Work Forces

Philip Weinberg, President and CEO of STRIVE, discusses the organization's intensive, evidence-based model for workforce development. Drawing on his background in government and the private sector, Weinberg explains how STRIVE blends rigorous professional training with long-term "lifetime" coaching to help individuals facing significant systemic barriers move into family-sustaining career paths. The conversation explores STRIVE's rapid national expansion to 14 cities and its strategic approach to scaling without compromising quality, including the use of anchor employer partnerships to backward map training for high-demand sectors like healthcare, construction, and logistics. Weinberg emphasizes the necessity of ongoing coaching and social supports as the "secret sauce" for helping students thrive and discusses practical steps for building more inclusive talent pipelines. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our workforce's consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education, industry, and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our workforces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Julian Alssid: Kaitlin, in so many of our recent conversations, we've discussed how workforce development has moved from being a fringe topic to a central economic imperative. Over the past few years, there's been a real shift toward a skills-based ecosystem where the goal isn't just a one-and-done credential, but creating sustainable, family-sustaining career paths. Kaitlin LeMoine: It's true, Julian. And while the policy and tech landscapes are moving incredibly fast, we keep coming back to the importance of the human connection and social supports as the true secret sauce for helping students persist and thrive in this new economy. It's not just about the technical training; it's also about the foundational skills that allow learners to pivot and grow over a long-term career. Julian Alssid: Which is why we're so thrilled to have our guest join us today. Phil Weinberg is a leader who's been at the forefront of this work for years, proving that high-quality, intensive training can fundamentally change the trajectory of lives and communities. Kaitlin LeMoine: That's right, and the breadth of his experience is what makes him such a powerful voice on this topic. Phil is the President and CEO of STRIVE, and his career has spanned the public, private, and nonprofit sectors. Before taking the helm at STRIVE in 2011, Phil was appointed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg as President of the New York City Workforce Investment Board, where he oversaw workforce development services for the nation's largest workforce area. Julian Alssid: Phil's journey also includes significant leadership in education reform and private sector experience at the management consulting firm Bain & Company. That range of experience is exactly what he's used to lead STRIVE through a period of growth and renewal. Under Phil's leadership, STRIVE has scaled to 14 cities, focusing on helping students facing significant systemic barriers across the workforce. Kaitlin LeMoine: STRIVE has become a model for how to blend rigorous professional training with the long-term coaching necessary to move people from entry-level jobs into sustained careers. We are so happy to have you with us today. Welcome to the Work Forces podcast, Phil. Phil Weinberg: Thank you. Really thrilled to be here. Thanks for having me. Kaitlin LeMoine: So, as we dive into the conversation today, Phil, we'd love to hear you tell us in your own words a bit more about your background and the journey really that led you to your role at STRIVE. Phil Weinberg: Like many people, my journey has not been a straight line. As you've described it, it's been across multiple sectors: corporate, government, and now nonprofit. And I think like a lot of people, I entered the corporate sector thinking that was where the innovation was happening and if you wanted to do big things in social impact, that would be the platform to do so. And I had an early experience, my first time working in government in Chicago—and this was, to date myself, back in the 1990s during the sort of welfare-to-work reform era—and I had the incredible fortune to work with some audacious, courageous, visionary leaders within government working across sectors. For me, it really opened my eyes to what's possible and the ability to do big things from government and across sectors. So, I once again found myself within city government, as you noted, working in the Bloomberg administration here in New York City, focused on helping uplift individuals and access career opportunities that could, in fact, change their lives and their families' lives. Whether it was on the education reform side, as you noted earlier, or on the career pathways economic mobility side, my career has always been focused on the question of how do we help individuals gain opportunity, advance in their lives, and how do we create communities that are more just and more equitable? And so, I'm sitting in city government, I got a call from a recruiter, and it turned out that STRIVE—which at that point had been around for about 25 years—had been a leading workforce development nonprofit. Its CEO was transitioning, and they were looking for someone to lead STRIVE into the future. And so, I came up to visit the team, I stepped into a classroom, and I was totally blown away by the power and depth and quality and engagement of what I encountered. And so for me, I just imagined how powerful it could be to take that model, expand it in New York City, and ultimately to consider how we could scale that in partnership with additional communities around the country. So, that's what landed me here at STRIVE. I am almost 15 years in and really grateful and energized to be part of this organization and part of this work, as you noted, in advancing economic mobility in communities nationally. Julian Alssid: So, STRIVE has grown and I guess serves about 2,000 students now, and you have a goal of serving 10,000 with support from your investors, like Blue Meridian and others. We heard you talk about using an evidence-based approach. So, how are you going to use an evidence-based approach to ensure that your really exponential expansion there doesn't compromise the quality of outcomes? Phil Weinberg: Well, I appreciate the question. You've actually perfectly hit upon the real tension, I think, for any organization that's considering taking a quality model and bringing it to scale. And so, I'd say that tension between quality, scale—I'd add a third component, which is the economics of scale—how to ensure that as you do grow and expand, that happens in a way that's economically sustainable. And I'd say for us, the focus on quality as we scale is first and foremost rooted in our values. As an organization, what do you believe? What's your true north? How do you ensure that you hold dear to those principles and those values and that all decisions really flow through that filter? More practically speaking, for us, it starts with having built an evidence-based model in partnership with our research partners at MDRC. So, building a comprehensive model that's built on the best evidence—in our case, it's predicated on the work-advance model. And so, ensuring that we are confident in the evidence base upon which our work is structured. Once we built that foundation, it then is incumbent on us as we grow to think about what elements of that model are essential to remain consistent across our communities we serve, and where do we see a need to be contextualized? In many cases, we see tremendous value and opportunity to contextualize the work that we do within our community partners—so, partnering with community colleges and other anchor institutions as a way to ensure that as STRIVE expands, we're doing so in a way that is authentic and resonant within the communities we serve. Investing in infrastructure. So, clearly there is delivering great programming, but then there is as you scale, having the infrastructure to support scaling with quality. What does that look like? These are often the not-the-most-glamorous aspects of operating a nonprofit, but often some of the most essential. Having strong performance systems and financial systems and data systems; having the operational backbone; having the programmatic support tools to ensure that as you grow, the support system is in place to grow thoughtfully and with quality. And I guess the last thing I would say is really growing with an eye toward being a learning organization. That certainly is one of our values at STRIVE, which is we've got a deep history to draw upon. Over four decades of service, over 90,000 students served. While there is that very deep reservoir of history of practice, we also approach the work with a great deal of humility, which is: what are we learning? What is the labor market telling us? What are the kind of policy context changes telling us? And how do we as an organization adapt accordingly so we can maintain quality and focus even as we grow? So, not an easy feat, I won't claim that we have sort of honed this, but we are certainly with a values-driven approach committed to that endeavor. Kaitlin LeMoine: So Phil, you've given us much to think about and dive into further during this conversation. I think one thing that, you know, would love to hear you talk a little bit more about are both the individuals you serve and also the programs you offer. So, we'd just love to hear a little bit more context there, especially as we think about, you know, like you're saying, the complexities of bringing these programs to different geographies and settings. Phil Weinberg: Absolutely. So STRIVE serves individuals who are talented, motivated, eager to work, and oftentimes have just found themselves facing steep obstacles—often multiple obstacles. And so, we serve a broad range of individuals 18 and older, men and women. People often come to us unemployed, mostly on public assistance, often facing obstacles like food insecurity, housing insecurity. Our average age is about 30, so we have many parents or those who are supporting minors. And so, we recognize that our students come to us with lots of aspirations. They've oftentimes found themselves in a revolving cycle of dead-end jobs, and the question is how do they break through? And so, the model we built is really one that provides a platform to support those individuals in gaining the kind of habits and behaviors to succeed at work, and also the skills and credentials and supports to be able to enter entry-level positions that have good jobs, the opportunities for advancement, and to support them in accomplishing their goals. I guess the one other thing I would note is that among the obstacles our students face, nearly half our students have been impacted by the justice system—whether they've been direct incarcerated and returning from incarceration. And I'd say one thing we've done programmatically is really ensure that we are meeting our students where they are. So, we've over the last decade worked with real intention to ensure that we are focusing our programmatic model and our interventions exactly where our students need them most. So, we've got, to your question about what are our programs, we've got our flagship program, which is our career path program. It supports a wide range of students to build careers in the healthcare, construction, and logistics industries. Those for us have become real areas of expertise. But then we noticed that about a third of our students had been coming to us justice-impacted and from incarceration, and as a learning organization we asked ourselves, are we doing enough for this population? And with that, we engaged with kind of the leading thought partners we could find and built what we now call our Fresh Start program, which is designed for adults coming home from incarceration. For us, that's just a recognition that those individuals are facing other obstacles—family reunification, search for housing—in ways that perhaps our general student population is not. And so, we've based on the work we've done at Rikers Island and with a number of correctional departments and partners, we've been honing and delivering this program for years and we're now in the process of replicating this. We just launched it in Birmingham, Alabama, the first time outside of New York City. And I'd say the last thing I would say is that we also noticed about a third of our students were coming to us as young adults, 18 to 24 years old. We asked ourselves the same question: are we doing enough to support the successful outcomes as a data-driven, kind of evidence-based organization? And what we did is we decided to kind of completely revisit and interrogate our programming for these young folks. So, we invited in thought partners who specialize in positive youth development, our research partners at MDRC, and we reconstructed based on our core programmatic pillars a model that we now call our Future Leaders model, which is specifically designed for 18 to 24-year-olds. This is a model that's probably been implemented in upwards of 15 to 20 communities serving thousands of young people across the country over the past decade. Julian Alssid: So, in your efforts, Phil, working with healthcare, construction, logistics, my understanding is that a key part of the model involves working with employers—sort of anchor employers—to map or backward-map capabilities into the programming. Can you speak about how that takes place? How do you keep current? You know, we do a lot of work building those bridges between education and training organizations and employers and it just feels like a constant process of trying to keep up. How do you do it and ensure long-term success? Phil Weinberg: Absolutely. I appreciate the terminology backward-map. In many cases, it feels like that is in fact the work that we're doing. So, it started with a very intentional selection of the sectors within which we work. We work with a terrific group of thought partners to determine where do we see opportunities in the labor market where there are good jobs with good wages and conditions for good jobs and advancement potential where you do not need a post-secondary degree in order to get your foot in the door in order to be able to then advance? For us, that in fact led us to healthcare and to construction and to logistics. But there's the concept, there's the labor market data and what it tells us and where we think there's opportunity, and then there's what, as you were noting Julian, the real world tells us—our employer partners, where there's actually demand and what the skill sets and competencies that graduates would need in order to be able to succeed and stand out and thrive in the workplace. So, for us, that starts with partnerships and listening closely to our employer partners. I'll use healthcare as just a brief example, and I'll use our kind of backyard, our flagship site in New York City and in the community of East Harlem. The largest hospital in East Harlem is called Mount Sinai, now part of Mount Sinai Health System. And they were trying to increase their community hiring and they were also trying to fill roles that they had found difficult to fill in their medical and billing system. So they reached out to STRIVE. This was not an area of expertise for us at the time but a real area of aspiration. This is over a decade ago, and we said we would love to co-create something with you. So we built a pilot, and the pilot was to serve a small group of 15 students to be able to access positions to operate those medical billing and scheduling systems. To fast-forward, it was a huge success because we started small, we co-created this in partnership with the human resources team—so, this was not a notion of doing something charitable or philanthropic; this was a notion of being a good community partner, a good community citizen as a hospital, and also trying to tap into untapped talent pipelines. I mention that example because that kernel, that seed that got planted really became the basis of a much broader-based partnership with that hospital system as they grew in a range of positions that are really positive entry points into healthcare careers—patient care positions, billing and coding positions, environmental positions, dietary transporters. The quality of those relationships, listening to our employer partners, understanding their pain points, understanding where they have hiring gaps... In fact, it was then in the pandemic when they said, you know what, we don't need the positions that you've been partnering with us on, but we now need to transport equipment and supplies across our system. Can you help us? And so, we leaned into that opportunity and that helped us build out a robust logistics pathway within our health partnerships and also beyond. For us, it really is about rooting in the partnership, listening closely to the human resources teams. When we now engage with new communities about where and how STRIVE might be able to make a difference, those are always predicated on deep partnerships, mutually beneficial partnerships with anchor employers. I'll just use the example of Ochsner Health in New Orleans, which has been a phenomenal partner of ours. I'd say the ingredients that make a partnership strong—and this is certainly true at Ochsner, it's true at Mount Sinai and many of our hospital system and other employer partners across the country—one is they inform our training, so they're co-creating with us the training and credentialing that's going to be needed for someone to enter and then stand out in those roles. Two is they're working with us on the recruitment process, so they're not guaranteeing our students positions, our graduates, but they certainly are committing that if we're producing quality graduates, that then there will be a pathway into their hiring system. Some of our hospital partners in fact have STRIVE listed on their dropdown menus for their hiring teams. And then I'd say lastly, just a really honest and candid partnership based on two-way communication: where is this working, where is this falling short, constantly iterating to ensure that we're learning lessons together, we're doing this in a way that is building strength and trust in the relationship and ultimately deepening partnerships and extending those into other domains. Kaitlin LeMoine: As you seek to expand and broaden your reach across states and regions, I'm wondering, do you also look at different industries as well? Because I can see, I mean, this is such an intensive process you're talking about. So, are you thinking you're going to focus in those three areas long-term, or do you also look to, you know, what are the emerging industries or areas of opportunity across different regions? Phil Weinberg: Absolutely. So, you must have been eavesdropping in our planning conversations. We're going through some intensive planning. I'd say a couple things. One is that we are always exploring where else do we think we can contribute to a local talent ecosystem and where do we think STRIVE is distinctly equipped to be able to do so. In many cases, it's by developing depth in areas where we feel like we are particularly well-suited and our student population is particularly well-suited. But as you noted, there's lots of shifts in the economy, there's lots of disruptions related to technology, and so it constantly challenges us to think about are there other industries or in some cases other occupations within industries where we're seeing increases or spikes in demand and where we think STRIVE might be particularly well-suited to support that? I would say that one of our ethos as an organization, we do try to be responsive and agile to the changing market conditions, but we try not to be overly opportunistic in the sense that it's okay to say no. It's okay to look at an opportunity, say that is certainly a need that the employer or the community has. Are we best equipped to support that community or those sets of employers to fill those needs? Those are the conversations that we're typically having as we think about ways in which we can deepen our impact and broaden it within current and new communities. Julian Alssid: Phil, so STRIVE is known for its support model, which I guess continues over time with your students. Can you speak a bit about the model and why do you see it, how does it fit and how is it part of the secret sauce of STRIVE? Phil Weinberg: Thank you for the question. I think Kaitlin, you had referenced early in the discussion the notion of human connection. Even in a world that is being disrupted rapidly by technology—and all organizations, including STRIVE, are actively assessing how to best incorporate that into our operating and programmatic models—we're also mindful that the communities we serve often respond best when there is a deep level of human connection. So we built a model predicated on five pillars. The first is an intensive work readiness model. It's a three to four-week workshop focused solely on building the workplace habits and mindset to succeed at work. People often call these soft skills; we know these as anything but soft. This is professional communication, managing conflict at work, working within teams. That really gives our students the leg up, not just to get the job but also to succeed once in the workplace. The second pillar of the model is our occupational skills training. This is ensuring that we are working with employer partners, assessing labor market conditions to ensure that our students are credentialed in a way that gives them access and hopefully a leg up within the hiring process. Third is our coaching. This is an important ingredient because so many of our students do come to STRIVE encountering so many obstacles, both professionally and personally, that the coaching model for us is an incredibly important way for us to help them understand and navigate through many of these challenges, whether it's related to childcare or food or transportation or navigating their entanglements with the justice system. The fourth pillar of course is our partnerships with our employers. So this is our job placement assistance. And our last pillar is another we call part of our secret sauce, which is our lifetime support. I would note that there is, to go back to your question about scale, there is such a temptation in the workforce arena, particularly how incentives are structured, to be transactional—look for short-term milestones. We know that if you're really committed to the notion of economic mobility for everyone—and for STRIVE that means individuals that often face some of the highest hurdles to accessing and thriving in good careers—then we've got to build a model that's in it for the long term and that supports students not just at the entry point but coaching them on the advancement. For us, that is ensuring that getting that first job is a great cause for celebration, but it's not the final destination. Once our students get that first job, we're sticking with them and supporting them as they're navigating through complexities in their lives and as they're looking to upskill and advance within their careers. So it is a holistic model, it is a long-term model, it's a very human-centered model. For us it means our students build a great sense of community at STRIVE and a great deal of trust. And for us that's a very sacred principle that we work really hard to preserve and to celebrate even as we grow. Kaitlin LeMoine: And building that network, I feel like is so critical for many reasons including that, you know, as we let off the conversation with, careers are not linear, jumping from one job to another. So having that sustained network is an invaluable component of your program model. We like, given that the show is called Work Forces, we like to have a question that asks about how others can be forces in the work. And so Phil, we're curious to hear from you, what are a couple of practical steps you can offer our listeners who are looking to become forces in building inclusive talent pipelines or helping populations who are facing barriers to navigating the job market? Phil Weinberg: I would note one of your opening comments, which is this is an important time to be committed to this work. It does seem that there is a recognition across sectors—policymakers, corporate employers, philanthropic—that if we're really going to live up to our values as a country of fairness and justice and opportunity for all, then we've got to build these pathways that allow everybody, regardless of circumstance, to access careers and opportunities that can allow them and their families to live dignified lives that have the potential for advancement. So there's room for lots of actors and players. There's a tremendous amount of energy and activity. We have the great fortune at STRIVE across our communities to partner with organizations big and small. So what I would say is no matter where one finds themselves, whether a person or an organization, it's really being clear about, you know, beginning with the end in mind. Julian, this is the backward-mapping that you talked about. When you think about the talent ecosystem, what are we trying to accomplish? What are the objectives? What are the incentives of the various players? What are the funding opportunities? And then that allows each person or organization to take a really clear-eyed view of, like, where do we fit? Where could we add value? Is there a role for us here? What is our superpower as an organization? And that means listening really closely, not just coming into a situation with a solution in mind, but having some hypotheses or having some areas where you may feel like you can contribute, but sometimes those assumptions get disrupted in the course of engaging with partners across sectors. So being really intentional about when you bring a clear solution into a conversation versus when you're bringing a kind of appetite to co-create and problem-solve as part of a larger ecosystem. The partnership development—this is capital, and it gets built during the partnership development process. None of us can achieve any measure of impact unless we do it together. This is with other nonprofit partners, governmental partners, employer partners, philanthropic partners. So really investing time in building those relationships, building that capital, listening closely, understanding where there might be additive value to contribute. Again, there are many instances where we at STRIVE say, you know what, we're not sure we're a suitable addition to this partnership or to this effort to advance mobility, or are there ways we can be a thought partner, you know, but it may not be an appropriate setting for us to establish operations. And I'd say one other thought is the notion of dreaming big but starting small. This was the Mount Sinai example that I noted. It sometimes can feel really frustrating when there are big, grandiose ideas being discussed and yet, you know, sometimes it's not clear what the starting point is. For STRIVE, whether it's launching a new site or launching a new program, we like to start small. We like to start, test, pilot, learn. Many communities have been exhausted by the promises and the commitments that have been made and not delivered upon. Our commitment is we want to ensure that we are delivering upon any commitment that we make. We're not falling short. We're building confidence that the early steps we're taking have the potential to grow and snowball into larger commitments. So there's lots of practical ways and practical steps that any person or any organization can take to do so intentionally and to be open to the co-creation and the opportunism that can emerge in the course of a collaboration. Julian Alssid: So Phil, as we wind down our conversation, how can our listeners, as you dream big and continue to move in the direction of expansion here on the national level, how can our listeners follow you, continue to learn more? Phil Weinberg: Certainly any listener can come to us online at our website at strive.org. So that's an easy way to plug in and get a sense of our programming, where we are, how we're thinking about the landscape of economic mobility. Can certainly follow us on our social sites: LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram. Sign up for our newsletter. Come visit one of our sites! If you happen to be in a city or visiting a city where STRIVE has a presence, we would welcome you to come. Our approach is a partnership model, so we welcome partners of all kinds, we welcome thought partners, learning communities. We invite folks to come in and, you know, you never know where those conversations can lead. Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. Well, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today, Phil. I feel like I'm taking so much from this conversation. I love that dream big, start small and really deciphering where you're going to play versus what you're not going to play, maybe, and making intentional choices on both sides of that line of thinking. So, really appreciate this conversation today. Thank you so much for joining us. Phil Weinberg: Thank you. Thank you both. Julian Alssid: Really appreciated your taking the time, Phil. Thanks. Phil Weinberg: Great. Thanks. Take care. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and especially thanks to our producer Dustin Ramsdell. If you are interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces.info/podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like, and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you are interested in learning more about Work Forces consulting practice, please visit workforces.info/consulting for more details about our multi-service practice.    

Ian Roark, Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Workforce Development at Pima Community College, discusses the institutional shift to merge academic affairs and workforce development into a single integrated system. Drawing on over 25 years of experience in education leadership, he explains how Pima is eliminating the traditional silos between credit and non-credit programs to create a cohesive educational model for all learners regardless of their point of entry. The conversation explores how the college uses an economic development lens to align legacy programs and new initiatives, such as specialized centers for excellence, with long term regional industry needs. Ian shares how Pima has supported the regional transition to an advanced manufacturing hub by integrating skills like optics and photonics into technical programs and expanding offerings in building construction, technology, and aviation. He highlights the importance of funding workforce development teams through general budgets rather than requiring them to generate their own revenue, which encourages deeper collaboration with academic faculty. Finally, he outlines how viewing workforce development as a paradigm rather than a series of programs enables community colleges to serve as the primary engine for regional economic mobility.   Transcript Julian: Welcome to the Work Forces podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher ed, industry, and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Kaitlin: In some of our more recent episodes, we have focused on the technical requirements for making credentials portable and transparent. While data standards and credential portability are essential to strengthening educational pathways for learners, many higher education institutions also still operate with an internal wall, so to speak, that separates credit programs from noncredit workforce development offerings. Julian: Yes, this separation can be difficult for learners to navigate. We often see degree programs and short term training operate with different funding structures and institutional goals. Breaking down these silos is an important priority for community college leaders. Kaitlin: And our guest today is leading institutional efforts to address these challenges. Ian Roark serves as the Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Workforce Development at Pima Community College. He brings over 25 years of experience in education to this role, spanning K12 leadership and community college administration. Julian: Under Ian's leadership, Pima has been at the forefront of workforce innovation through the development of specialized centers for excellence and new models for apprenticeships and community college baccalaureate degrees. Ian also serves on a number of boards and committees at the local, state, and national levels. Notably, he was named to the Aspen Presidential Fellowship for Community College Excellence in 2019, called to serve on the Higher Learning Commission's Credential Lab Innovation Design Team in 2024, and has advised numerous organizations, including New America and Education Design Lab. Kaitlin: At Pima, Ian is implementing a no wrong door strategy to ensure that every student has a direct path to economic mobility and higher wages regardless of where they begin their education. Welcome to the podcast, Ian. We are happy to have you here. Ian Roark: Great, thanks Julian and thanks Kaitlin. It's a little embarrassing at times or humbling to hear a little bit of your biography read out loud, so I just want to start off by saying it's an honor to serve Pima Community College and our southern Arizona community in this role. And none of those things would have ever happened if it weren't for the amazing work of the team that supports me, administrators as well as our amazing faculty and staff at the institution. And I'd like to give a special shout out to our chancellor, Dr. Jeff Nasse, to whom I report, as it was his idea to merge academic affairs and workforce development under this combined role as provost. And so really excited to speak with you and the audience around the journey that we've been on at Pima Community College for this past 11 years and counting. Kaitlin: Well, we can't wait to dive in with you on all of that today. Ian, to get us started, can you please tell us in your own words a little bit more about your background and the journey that led to your current role and work at Pima? Ian Roark: Yeah, sure. I like to start off by saying I've been in school since I entered kindergarten. I haven't worked in the private sector ever, although a lot of my work has engaged the private sector quite often, especially in the workforce development roles that I've held in the past. So it's, you know, interesting to spend your whole entire, you know, working life and school life in school, both in K12 and in higher ed as a student and as, you know, a staff member, faculty member, and now administrator. I sometimes, if I had to compare myself to like what is your specialty, I'm sort of a Swiss Army knife of education in ways. I started off as a music teacher, I have a music degree. I quickly went into getting certified in K12 to teach social sciences and I've taught everything from sociology to psychology to history to world, you know, world geography and world history. I did a lot of curriculum work in K12, really outlining entire scopes of sequences from kindergarten to seniors in high school on learning outcomes and how those could be assessed. Went into administration in K12 as a Career Tech director and I had campus principal oversight over a technical campus, so really got to do a lot of operational work in working with faculty and working with students. My first role in higher education was as Dean of Career and Technical Education at Odessa College in Odessa, Texas, and just would like to give another shout out to my sponsor, mentor, and friend, Dr. Greg Williams, who is still president at Odessa after all these years, who opened the door for community college work and really opened my eyes. And then the community college experience really just, I fell in love with it. He promised me that you'll never want to do anything else when you enter community college, you're going to want to stay here until you retire, and so far he's been right. Just what we do at the community college world. So I served as Dean and then Executive Dean at Odessa College. I entered came to Pima Community College in 2015. Then we were structured as six quasi-independent campuses, each with a president reporting to our then-chancellor Lee Lambert. I reported to one president, but I was the first matrix vice president, meaning the institution was rigidly structured around these campuses and the reporting lines at these campuses, and the intent all along was for my role and the team that I built to start working cross-functionally across all these campuses with deans and faculty to break down barriers and silos as it related to serving employers in our community and ensuring that our learners had pathways to upward mobility in key industry sectors. And so my role has evolved over all of these years. I was Vice President of Workforce Development, then became Vice President of Workforce Development and Strategic Partnerships, then Vice Chancellor of Workforce Development and Innovation, and then now this past year serving both as acting and now non-acting provost and executive vice chancellor. And really the journey all along has been pointed in the direction of what you outlined, which is breaking down these artificial barriers that in higher education we put up, right, these firewalls between credit and non-credit, between workforce programs and academic programs. These are things that we've constructed on our own, in part because we're incentivized by our accreditation systems, by our federal financial aid systems to do so, but also because it's fall, spring, summer, rinse, repeat. Higher education is a very, going back to my music roots, rhythmic, right? There's a rhythm that's always underlying the operations. And it goes back, as you know, to an agrarian calendar, to Carnegie units that are named after a prominent individual who literally created it just as a way for us to account for the time we spend doing things in higher education. So once those things are set, it's very hard for us to break it. But at Pima we're doing some really interesting and amazing work, not just because it's interesting and amazing, but because we have seen firsthand how eliminating these silos and breaking down these traditional firewalls is what's best for our students, what's best for our community, and ultimately allows us to fulfill our mission at Pima, which is to empower every learner for every goal every day. Julian: Well, it seems that the big firewall is the academic affairs and workforce development separation. And so Pima's made this strategic decision to merge these worlds with you now at the helm of that effort. Can you speak with us a bit about the reasoning behind the shift and how it supports this idea of a no wrong door approach for learners? Ian Roark: Yeah, really right. So at the end of the day, whether a student is coming to Pima Community College for adult basic education where they want to earn their high school equivalency because perhaps they dropped out of high school or had circumstances that impacted that educational journey or put it to a stop, whether they're coming to us for non-credit workforce training, or as we're starting to refer to it as professional credit for upskilling and reskilling opportunities, or they're coming to us for a credit-bearing certificate or a degree in career and technical education, and/or still a primary mission of transfer—two-thirds of our students on any given year are coming here because they want to transfer and primarily to the University of Arizona, we are proud to partner with them of course here in Tucson—at the end of the day, they're not doing that because they want to earn college credit or get a certificate, they're doing these things, they're choosing Pima because of what's at the end of that educational journey, whichever door they enter. It's because they know that whether it's earning a certificate, earning a degree, getting an industry-recognized credential, or completing the Arizona General Education Curriculum to transfer to one of our state universities, or earning a full transfer degree and then transferring, they're doing all of these things because they know at the end of that there's a better job opportunity. And so at the end of the day, it's really about workforce development whether we call it transfer, whether we call it workforce development, whether we call it career and technical education. Our students are seeking and earning these credentials because of what it does for them and their households, which is a better pathway to upward mobility. So we really need to start framing all of it as workforce development. It's not this dichotomy that we have erected and then perpetuated. It really is workforce development for all of our students. And it's great that our transfer students want to pursue transfer degrees. We want to ensure that they're making those choices though in a career context. And so a little bit of our work this past year has been working across academic affairs and in partnership with student affairs to look at what the first-year experience looks like for all of our learners. And so starting next year, we are having a more career-focused first-year experience and onboarding process for all of our students. And one of our strategic plan goals that's emerging out of our current strategic planning process is: what would it look like if every single learner at the college, whether they're a transfer student, even in a traditional area like psychology or economics or a STEM field like engineering, what would it look like if every single learner had an opportunity to have a work-based learning experience or an experiential experience tied to real-world application as part of their program of study? And that's kind of how we're approaching it. That could be the reality, especially when we start to think about the impact of artificial intelligence and things like XR or AR/VR technology—how can we even use those sorts of technologies to bring those real-world applications into the classroom if we can't physically tie every single student to an internship or a job shadow per se? So those are the things we're thinking about, already putting in place with respect to the first-year experience. And it's really an exciting time to see how, really across the college, faculty in particular are embracing this. I know that Julian knows one of my partners and a team member, the Assistant Vice Chancellor of Workforce Development, Amanda Abens. She's traveling with one of our journalism faculty in a transfer program to a journalism conference to talk about the unification of workforce development and the academic piece in this particular program of study. And so we're seeing people really embrace the idea that this is not a dichotomy. We are one family, one team focused on one mission, which is to better serve our students so that they can accomplish their college and career goals, whatever those may be, as long as they are tied to a pathway for upward mobility. Kaitlin: So to that point, the last point you just made, how are you working to ensure that the pathways that are set up lead to tangible outcomes like wage gains, while making it easier for students to stack those skills? Because I think what you said earlier about really all of this learning is workforce development in some ways, I think really resonates for us. I mean, we have talked about that, Julian, I feel like numerous times just about, at least at the high level of, man, it feels like now more than ever education is—the point is like, how do we think about how to develop talent and what does that look like? And how does it look like to develop the workforce of the future? And so when you said that, it really resonated with me. But I'm curious to hear a little bit more about what is your thinking behind building for those tangible outcomes. Ian Roark: Yeah, in the opening Julian mentioned the centers for excellence that are at our now five campuses at Pima Community College and we are seeking to open more. But we have over the past decade been opening these centers for excellence that are not only extraordinary physical locations of great magnitude with respect to career technical education and increased square footage, top-of-the-line state-of-the-art technology working with industry to develop our programs, but it's also concentrating programs on a single geography so that faculty can co-create programs together aligned to business and industry. And we've done a lot of great work in the workforce development and technical education space, so we've started a lot of new programs with exactly what you said, Kaitlin, in mind, which is: what are the pathways that are aligned to the economic development priorities of our community and that lead to opportunities for increased wages and upward mobility? I won't go through all of them, but I'll talk about some of them. And I do want to put it in the context of the difference of workforce development in the here and now and workforce development with an economic development lens, because there is a difference. Workforce development here and now is really about our institution's ability to respond to whatever request business and industry brings to us today. So my ability, my team's ability to respond to whatever request, say you or Julian brought for Kaitlin as a potential employer, hypothetical employer in our community, is really based on whether or not we foresaw that request coming. So we can only respond with the capacity that we have now, which is based on past strategy. Our current strategy that is rooted in economic development means partnering not only with business and industry but business and industry associations, our economic development partners—for us that's the Chamber of Southern Arizona, the economic development offices of Pima County and all of our surrounding municipalities, including Tucson, suburbs—and really learning about where community leadership, civic leadership wants Tucson and Pima County to be ten years from now, twenty years from now, and designing our programs with that mindset at the forefront. So pictured behind me is an example of that. That's a over 100,000 square foot advanced manufacturing training center that was conceptualized in 2017 in partnership with business and industry, opened two years ago, and it was built under the prospect of: we are becoming an advanced manufacturing community. Ten years ago we weren't, we were a call center community. Now the predominant number of economic development leads that our partners bring to the community are in advanced manufacturing. And so we built this center not because it's an awesome facility and has lots of cool things in it like robots and lasers and optics and all these things, it's because we knew that's where the civic leadership wanted the community to go, and now we have the ability to train at scale for any employer partner that either relocates or expands in our community. So that's been the trajectory over the past decade. Areas like advanced manufacturing, IT cybersecurity, the new health profession center of excellence. But right now we also have a challenge, Kaitlin, which is we are over 50 years old, almost 55 years old as an institution, and we have a lot of legacy programs. We're having to look at those, say, is this really the best way to offer this program to our learners? Is it really the best program for us to have? Is it really aligned to business and industry? So I'm sure like many listeners of this show, we have our program review processes that sort of answer those questions on a four-year cycle of program review for every program. But by merging academic affairs and workforce development, we have brought in all of the expertise of the workforce development team into the program review process to help the academic affairs professionals answer that question and do it together. Right? Previously that really wasn't the case. Academic affairs had its own process and workforce development over here, we were starting lots of new programs in partnership, but we really didn't have a role in assessing and validating all of the existing legacy programs. And so the unification of academic affairs and workforce development really allows for the opening of the door down to a very detailed and rigorous level of depth and engagement analyzing the outcomes of programs not only in the traditional context of persistence, retention, and completion, but labor market alignment. Is this credential actually what is required to get the job that this program purports to allow students to get? And is it really a good return on investment for the individual learner, their household, and the community at large for us to be offering this program at this price point? Perhaps there's a different way we can offer it. So that's just a little bit about how we're thinking of both the starting up of the new programs in a center of excellence context, but looking at the legacy programs that we have and being really judicious on how we answer those questions with respect to market-driven curriculum. Julian: It is such a challenge. When you first started talking about, you know, like fall, spring, summer, rinse, repeat, you know, having spent my time in community college and working a lot more on the workforce side, it isn't, as you know, that is not necessarily the same calendar, you know? Like if you're responding to workforce needs, they happen when they happen. So I'm still interested, I mean I get the idea of kind of bringing rigor to try to figure out how legacy programs fit, but of course your team, your faculty, you know, they did not sign up—the academic faculty by and large didn't sign up to like responding to the flavor of the day or the technology of the moment. And so how do you begin to reconcile the two in actuality and practice? Can you give us an example or two? You know, so for example, I mean I'll say in our world, we're doing some work now with community college that, you know, like many, kind of their manufacturing programs sort of go away on the credit side because like, who's going to wait all that time to get a degree when you can go out and get a decent job with less training? Now there's kind of this resurgence. How do you bring these programs back, both for short-term credentialing and for longer term? How do you do it? And yeah, can you give us an example or two? Ian Roark: Yes, certainly. Of course it varies by program area, right, because these things are not monolithic across even career and technical education, let alone traditional transfer programs. Every industry is different, and I think that's the first thing we have to keep in mind is let's work with our industry partners to really truly understand what's going on in their particular corner of the labor market and then ensure that we are responding in kind. Because a credit program is certainly not the answer to every labor market issue, and neither is a short-term training program the answer to every labor market issue. It really is industry-specific and market-driven. And so of course the cornerstone of that is partnership. So if you're not—if faculty and deans are designing programs without the input and connections that the workforce development internal partners bring to the table with respect to not only advisory committee members but again the thinking that economic development partners and workforce investment board partners and, you know, community-based organization partners bring to the table with respect to the diversity of people that we're serving in our community, then we're really designing programs, you know, in isolation and perpetuating sort of those stovepipes if you will. So of course it's industry alignment first and foremost. But then how we approached it at Pima—A because of resources and just the necessity of it, but B understanding that if we're going to eliminate these stovepipes, these silos, that we didn't start building short-term or not-for-credit or professional credit upskilling/reskilling opportunities in isolation of our full-time faculty and deans. The strategic choice that we made intentionally all along was that we are going to shelf all of our white labeling and third-party non-credit offerings. Right? That's not Pima. This may not be the case for every other community college, and I'm certainly not suggesting that every community technical college should or could do this. But for us, based on feedback we got from employers and frankly non-credit students in 2020 when we were working with the Education Design Lab to develop our Pima Fast Track program—short-term non-credit programs that wholly stack into our certificate and degree programs—the feedback was: do away with all of the white labeling things that you're doing and invest in building non-credit programs that are unique to you, Pima. And so we understood that the only way we can do that is to engage not only our industry partners but our full-time faculty and our adjunct faculty who are subject matter experts. And so all of our non-credit offerings that we offer through our divisions are designed and developed by our full-time faculty and adjunct faculty in partnership with business and industry, and then they are taught by those same individuals. And if we can't find an adjunct faculty member in the existing pool, we of course work with industry partners to recruit, as do many community technical colleges, from our advisory committee or other partners to teach those courses. And so a prime example, just yesterday evening, super excited, we did a ribbon-cutting for—you can't see it—a building behind the building pictured is our new building construction technology facility that our Dean Greg Wilson of Applied Technology and department head faculty member John Gerard, like really co-led in terms of developing and opening. It's 20,000 square feet under roof for HVAC, both residential and industrial, plumbing, electrical, so on and so forth. It's an amazing facility, and it was a long time coming. But during the ribbon-cutting speeches, it was recognized that the building construction technology faculty and team don't only serve the credit-seeking students that will be taking classes now in that new facility. They are actually teaching classes at what's called the Humberto Lopez Family Foundation Center of Opportunity, which is a residential facility for the unsheltered people in our community. They are delivering building construction technology training at that facility offsite in a non-credit fashion. They partner with our instructors that teach in our state penitentiary system, who we're also delivering our certificate programs in construction technology at that site. They've partnered with Habitat for Humanity to do offsite work related to building tiny homes for people who need shelter in our community. And they do non-credit workforce training fast track programs in this new facility, as they did in the old, and also provide the related technical instruction for apprenticeship. So just in that example, and by the way, I forgot, our building construction technology faculty also work with our adult basic education team on offering what's called Integrated Basic Education Skills Training, or IBEST, which is where people who don't yet have their high school diploma are taking college-level building construction technology courses that are co-taught by reading and mathematics faculty and building construction technology faculty in the same class—not at the same week, like literally in the same class, these co-designed classes. That's preparing them to pass their GED and earn a college certificate all at the same time. That's just one program. That's building construction technology. So that shows that when you have the mindset of innovation but the open hands of partnership between workforce development and academic affairs internally, right, how faculty and teams will respond. They are truly offering their curriculum in every way you could imagine just with that one example. And I could go on with others, but you asked for one, Julian. So, you know, shout out and congratulations to them again for the ribbon-cutting event that we had yesterday, and they deserve the accolades because they truly are living out what you're talking about. In building construction technology, there is no wrong door, no matter who you are in our community. If you want the outcomes that that program provides, you will find an open door. Julian: It really is striking how many pathways into that programming there are and that you've built in direct response to community needs. I mean, I'm wondering, you know, what happens when perhaps there's a workforce development program or offering that maybe aligns with multiple academic programs? How do you go about navigating that? I don't know how much of a nitty-gritty question that is, but it feels like, wow, I mean there's a lot of transferable skills and transferable content knowledge, right? And so what does that look like? Ian Roark: Well, we just had—we literally just went through a whole entire process to answer that question for what's called the optics industry here in southern Arizona. So optics and photonics is a very important enabling technology that is in many different industries. For those that aren't familiar with Tucson and southern Arizona, we have a large operation of RTX, or aka Raytheon, here, which is advanced manufacturing and integrated integration with respect to aerospace and defense. We also have a lot of maintenance and repair operations in aviation technology and then from there we have just a lot of small and medium-sized suppliers in advanced manufacturing that serve as a hub to these primary industries. And then also we have medical device manufacturing with Roche Ventana here in Tucson. Roche is an international company. Optics is a central integrated technology in all of these different fields. And so we were approached by what's called the Optics Valley, an outgrowth if you will of the Arizona Technology Council, an entity that we partner with often and rely on with respect to their expertise and engagement with all of the technological fields throughout Arizona and especially for us southern Arizona. And at first the conversations were sort of what we experience a lot in community college, which is: there's a labor market need for this specialized skill set among optics and photonics technicians, you need an optics and photonics degree. But we started looking in working with the group and on analyzing the labor market and what optics and photonics technicians actually do, and at the end of the day, we all came together in not only consensus but agreement of, right, a degree program for Pima in optics and photonics might be a thing down the road, but what we're seeing is that these are additive skills to programs that we already offer in our automated industrial technology and manufacturing programs. And so together we co-created some upskilling and reskilling opportunities in the professional credit space that we have already launched. On April 27th, we will launch our first round which is basically the fundamentals of optics and photonics and then over the summer, handling and logistics with respect to optics and photonics. And so it was a prime example of what you talked about—like we didn't really need to start from scratch. We already had a lot of programs that were 70, 80 percent aligned perhaps, you know, pulling numbers out of my hat, but like a lot of alignment already, but we were missing key pieces. And that means we were missing subject matter expertise among our faculty and we were missing the equipment needed to make up the rest of that gap. And so by partnering together, we have our subject matter experts with new adjunct faculty, we have new equipment that Optics Valley helped us acquire, and it's been a great partnership. And so a shout out to Katie Schwartz from Optics Valley, and again Dean Wilson and his faculty, and our workforce development team under Assistant Vice Chancellor Amanda Abens, who really came together to again co-create something that was market-driven and aligned to exactly what the industry was requiring. Julian: Wow, I have so many questions, Ian, and I think we may have to have like, you know, a chapter two, chapter three, because you're just—it's amazing what you've been doing for years, and so cool to see the latest iteration and have this catch-up. For our audience, for our listeners, what practical steps can you offer, you know, whether they're higher ed leaders navigating organizational change and policy and economic changes, or employers looking for deeper partnerships? You know, what practical steps can you suggest to help these folks better align their work with one another? It's really to serve our learners and the workforce. Ian Roark: To my colleagues and peers who are in positions of leadership and decision-making at your community and technical colleges, you know, thinking around—thinking about workforce development not as a series of programs, but as a paradigm is the first step. Right? When you think of—like it's workforce development—and so you automatically picture somebody with a hammer or a welding torch or, you know, a ratchet set in an automotive technology lab. That really feeds back into the stereotypes of, in this corner we have workforce development and in that corner we have our academics. Right? You really need to think about workforce development as a paradigm. How is your entire institution and all of the programs that you offer aligned to the labor market, whether it's at the certificate, two-year degree, or bachelor's degree level? Even if you're only offering the first two years of a bachelor's degree in your transfer programs, are they actually aligned to the bachelor's degrees that your community needs with respect to economic development and upward mobility? So workforce development not as a series of programs, but as a paradigm. And then secondly, right, are you investing in your workforce development team or are you expecting them to earn their own revenue? A strategic shift that we made at Pima Community College is that we generally fund as a part of the regular budget our workforce development team, because 11 years ago that team was charged with "selling" non-credit training, and what we discovered was they're selling a product our industry partners in the community didn't want or need. They want some of that, but not enough to sustain an entire workforce development unit. What did our business industry partners want? They wanted new programs, apprenticeships, certificates, degrees, buildings, all of the things that a revenue-generating self-sustaining unit wasn't empowered to do, wasn't funded to do. And so we removed that sort of disincentive for workforce development to partner with academics by saying, we're going to generally fund you. And the commitment that we made back to the institution is you will see the development of new credit programs, new non-credit programs, apprenticeships, grant-making opportunities, philanthropic partnerships through our Pima Foundation because we're gaining credibility with business and industry which opens that door, and now which you're—like again, a physical manifestation behind me—new things at the college that nobody 15 years ago would have even thought possible. And true to our word, we have delivered at the institution on that promise. By investing in workforce development and thinking about it as a paradigm and not a series of programs or an isolated self-sustaining unit over in the corner, we have shaped the trajectory of the entire institution. Importantly, right, we have credibility with business and industry. We can always do more, we can always do better, but we have gained a lot of credibility with business and industry and that's important not only for the reputation of the institution but again back to our mission, what we're really about, which is opening the doors for people in our community to pathways that they never would have imagined themselves setting foot on. Places where they can go from abject poverty, not having any education at all, to being able to sustain entire households with the earnings that they have in these new and exciting occupations that we are now aligned to be able to provide that education and training experience for. You know, it really is—those are the two things, and I know I brought it back to the mission—but workforce development as a paradigm and invest in your workforce development team. Don't leave them out there gnawing on leather on some shipwreck, like, you know, as they're trying to cross the Pacific Ocean. Give them the tools they need to help the rest of your college achieve its mission. Kaitlin: Well, thank you so much for those very practical steps. Really love the focus on really this holistic intentional strategy that allows for teams to be working cross-functionally and really as you're saying, right, like everyone rises when we have a chance to collaborate in such a not only cross-functional but just mutually beneficial way both for people within the institution, for the learners, and for the community at large. As we wind down the conversation today, Ian, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work and the innovations and great efforts happening at Pima? Ian Roark: Yeah, usually I would say I post a lot on LinkedIn, it's the only social media outlet you'll find me in. I've been a little busy with this joint role of academic affairs and workforce development, right? We're still reorganizing, we're still figuring some things out, so I'm a little behind on the LinkedIn posting, but LinkedIn is a great place to see some of the things that we've done and I will start posting again at some point soon. And, you know, occasionally appear on podcasts such as this one, so I'll take Julian up on the offer for part two. But again, it's been an honor and a privilege to represent our college on Work Forces podcast and so again, a special thank you to our board, to again our chancellor, Dr. Jeff Nasse. It was, you know, he was the one who said, yeah, we're going to go one step further than you've already taken this, we're going to merge academic affairs and workforce development. And so just a special thank you to Chancellor Nasse and his leadership. And finally again to the team that really is—works with me and supports me in our work, right? We have an amazing leadership team, the provost leadership team, but also our faculty and staff. Without our faculty, who do what they do in the classroom each and every single day, the college wouldn't exist, right? People don't sign up for Pima Community College because there's a provost or any other position, they sign up for classes because there are faculty who are doing amazing things in service to our students each and every day. And that's just excited again to represent all of our team here on this podcast. Julian: Thank you, Ian. It's really been a great conversation. Ian Roark: Thank you so much. Kaitlin: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support, and a special thanks to our producer Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces.info/podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like, and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about Work Forces Consulting, please visit workforces.info/consulting for more details about our multi-service practice.  

Audrey Ellis, Founder and Principal of T3 Advisory, discusses the strategic and human-centered implementation of artificial intelligence across higher education. Drawing on extensive experience in college policy and institutional effectiveness, she explains how institutions can move from isolated experimentation to a comprehensive AI strategy that supports all learners. The conversation highlights findings from a national study titled AI for Institutional Transformation, which was conducted in partnership with Complete College America and funded by the Gates Foundation. Audrey describes artificial intelligence as an accelerator of existing institutional challenges, such as disorganized data and limited human capacity, while identifying specific opportunities for positive impact, including in the areas of student advising and financial aid. She introduces open practical tools for leaders, including an AI adoption rubric and a survey suite designed to capture feedback from students and staff. Audrey encourages leaders to take a proactive approach to AI use, emphasizing the importance of establishing clear rules to foster safe and effective experimentation. These efforts can lead to the automation of routine administrative work, allowing educators more time to build the human connections that support student success. Transcript Julian: Welcome to the Work Forces podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. This podcast is an outgrowth of our workforce's consulting practice through weekly discussions. We seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher ed, industry, and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Julian: Kaitlin, AI has become such a pervasive topic. It seems to make its way into every conversation we have on this podcast, on this planet, from skills validation to credential transparency to workforce development. But there is a conversation that we haven't had in some time. How are colleges and universities approaching AI implementation? How are they approaching it not just in the classroom, but across the technical infrastructure that supports running these large complex institutions? Kaitlin: Yes, that is a critical question. We hear a lot about AI experimentation from faculty piloting tools to students using AI when studying or completing assignments, but less about the coordination and decision making challenges underneath it all. How do institutions move from pockets of experimentation to a holistic strategy? And how do they address the human capacity, governance structures, and academic considerations required to scale AI responsibly? Julian: Exactly. And that is where our guest today comes in. Audrey Ellis is the founder and principal of T3 Advisory, where she partners with higher education institutions on AI strategy, change management, and student centered process improvement. Her research focuses on AI adoption, institutional transformation, and addressing initiative fatigue in the higher ed. Audrey has co-authored numerous publications on AI and student success and frequently delivers keynotes and workshops on technology, equity, and education. Kaitlin: Audrey holds a doctor of management in community college policy and administration from the University of Maryland Global Campus, an MS Ed from the University of Pennsylvania, and a BA from Tufts University. Audrey brings both consulting and firsthand institutional experience leading effectiveness, strategic planning, and student success initiatives at community colleges. Welcome to Work Forces, Audrey. We are so glad to have you with us today. Audrey Ellis: Thanks. It's great to be here. Julian: And though we gave a bit about your background, we would love to hear you tell us a bit more about who you are and the journey that led you to founding T3 Advisory. Audrey Ellis: It's an honor to be here and really excited to talk about this ubiquitous topic of AI in every industry, really. And I think that's what makes it interesting in higher ed, right, because we serve all the industries. So it not only is appearing there, but in how we make all of our decisions on campus these days. A little bit about me, I started T3 a little over three years ago. I am from New England, Massachusetts. We are focused on supporting institutions that are access oriented, so they really serve the vast majority of students in this country in their postsecondary experience, but that often don't get the same resources allocated to them as the elite or more well-funded institutions. So that looks like community colleges, minority serving institutions, and regional publics primarily. Especially because those institutions are making a tremendous amount of decisions that need to be made around AI and often with less resources than, you know, their peers at other institutions that we hear about more often in the news. So really trying to create more knowledge sharing among those access oriented institutions so we can all learn together right now, because I think we need to face the reality that we're all a little bit of a student when it comes to AI. Feel like every morning I'm starting a new course because the tool changes overnight, it seems. So back to basics every single day with Claude and ChatGPT, Gemini, starting new features every morning. Julian: Yeah, it is just dizzying, isn't it? Audrey Ellis: It sure is. Julian: So your organization recently released a national study examining AI implementation across colleges and universities. Would love to hear about the study and some of the biggest challenges that higher ed is facing. Audrey Ellis: Yeah, we conducted a national study called AI for Institutional Transformation. We were really generously funded by the Gates Foundation and we worked with Complete College America to conduct interviews with senior leaders at over 30 institutions across the country from that segment that I just described. Our goal was really to understand how institutional leaders are kind of navigating a dual path. So we have institutions both trying to figure out today, tomorrow, this semester, next semester, what does AI mean for us? But we also are trying to understand, you know, dream big, wave a magic wand, what does AI mean in three years or five years? With the exponential rate of change and that comes with opportunity, and so we wanted to understand kind of both sides of that conversation: policy, governance, practical changes, but then also really big picture what could AI mean for how we do work in higher ed. And so all of this work was considered public goods funded in their investment strategy at Gates. So that's really exciting because it means that everything that we have published is available to the field for free. So I appreciate you having us on. I just really want to make sure that institutions know that this body of research and all of the tools that we've developed are available and can be downloaded, repurposed, edited, modified today. So we'll be sure to share the link and hopefully you can share that out with the listeners, but really excited to kind of get into what we learned. Kaitlin: Yes, so please tell us a bit about, you know, what do you see as some of the biggest—I guess you could start at either end of the spectrum—what are some of the biggest challenges or the biggest opportunities? Why don't you take us where you'd like to go first and then we can discuss the whole spectrum. Audrey Ellis: Sure. Let's start with the challenges. I think I'm a practical person and there's no doubt there's a lot of opportunity, but I think in order to be around to play with the opportunity, we have to figure out right now. So let's start there. We need to kind of, I think, what we've heard and what we've seen from the institutions that we've interviewed and studied is that very few institutions are taking a coordinated strategic approach to their AI adoption right now. So what that means is that kind of as you described in the intro, there are a tremendous amount of pilots and experimentation happening at institutions. And I feel pretty confident saying that probably every institution has at least a little bit of AI experimentation. I don't think that any institution could say they have no AI happening on campus anymore. But what that looks like at most institutions is a very decentralized, dispersed, kind of scattershot approach to AI adoption and AI innovation. Which isn't bad. So I'm not trying to suggest that institutions have made the wrong move so far, but that's come out of kind of a couple of steps that leaders have made that has led them to take this more decentralized approach. So we developed a rubric that helps institutional leaders think about kind of all the different decision areas or dimensions of AI adoption, everything from budget investments to mission alignment. All of those play a part. And when we saw our institutions that are kind of the most far ahead with their institutional transformation, they had addressed all of the different areas, whereas we saw that institutions, and really like around 80 percent of the institutions that we interviewed, are more in this scattershot area of implementation. And that's often happened because there's been a real focus on things like policy and academic integrity, which is certainly an important thing to consider, and I don't want to diminish the value of the conversation around academic integrity. But often it's led to kind of kicking the can down the road on any other decision making around AI. Like, we're going to stand up a committee or a task force and until they have the policy, we're doing AI, that box is checked, and we'll get there later. And what that's leading to is a growing divide between institutions who are taking this more strategic centralized approach around AI adoption where they're thinking, you know, what are the biggest strategic plays that I can make right now? Whether it's workflow efficiency or improving the student experience or kind of like winning back time that, you know, from an initiative fatigue standpoint, like our stakeholders on campus have been, you know, saying that they've been wearing multiple hats for decades with all of the reform and work that we do. So there's a lot of strategic opportunity here. But importantly, the divide is happening not only between decentralized and centralized or strategic adoption, but that is happening across kind of the resource lines of institutions. So those institutions that are more well resourced, which we used endowments as a proxy for resourced, those institutions that have those massive endowments are taking a centralized strategic approach and that gap is going to further widen if institutions don't figure out how to wrap their arms fully around their institutional strategy. A couple of other kind of big findings we saw is that, you know, staff are really not being considered in the training equation. You know, in higher ed, and I'm sure from your workforces angle this resonates, like we call ourselves the connector to the workforce, like we that is a huge part of our mission. But our institutions are also part of the workforce. Like, we employ so many people in our region. And we've actually often overlooked a really significant part of our own workforce in this moment when it comes to talking about AI skills and AI literacy. So we found that almost none of the institutions that we interviewed had intentional training for their staff. They were, you know, leveraging teaching and learning centers, professional development for faculty, but because there's often not a comparable center for staff, those folks were getting pretty overlooked in the training conversation. And that's just an example of the fact that AI is in a way just an accelerator of the existing inefficiencies and process challenges that we have at our institutions. And it's shining a new light on challenges that are not new. Whether that is, you know, trying to put dirty data into AI that has been dirty and causing inefficiencies or challenges with reporting for decades, but now AI is making you realize the data quality issue that you have, or whether it's that you don't have, you know, kind of standalone institutionalized professional development for your staff. There's just a number of existing challenges that AI is really illuminating right now. I'll end it here with, like, the big risk is that our institutions are feeling the pressure of having to keep up. Like, they're not ignorant of this widening gap. And that puts them in a bit of a vulnerable position when it comes to their relationships with vendors who often bring really important expertise and solutions to campus. But without having kind of senior leaders' arms wrapped around their strategy, it lends itself to a more impulsive vendor strategy that might not be thinking about the comprehensive picture that an institution needs to consider before they get into a long term contract. Julian: So it really is sort of, it sounds almost like it's really surfacing just what we already know to be these huge issues and inequities and so on. So, what do you see as some of the bigger areas of opportunity? And I guess and I'm particularly interested—I'm interested in all the institutions—but particularly interested in the institutions that are more challenged. You know, we do a lot of work, for example, with community colleges and, you know, they just don't have the resources and and and probably and are never going to. What are the opportunities for all institutions? Audrey Ellis: First let me just say that I don't mean to sound like doom and gloom. I realize I just ran through so many challenges only to just kind of paint the picture of the importance of taking a strategic approach. So I think in order to take advantage of the opportunities that AI can present, which I'll talk about in one second, I just want to make a plug for the resources that we've developed that are all public goods. So everything from toolkits, talking guides, facilitation resources, how to develop staff training around AI. All of those challenges I described have free resources to try to help institutional leaders wrap their arms around this. But I think that the opportunity is huge, right? Like, I having studied initiative fatigue for a long time can't tell you how many times I've heard faculty, staff, senior leaders say, "I would love to do more of this best practice you're teaching me about right now," whatever it be, like let's just take a faculty professional development about universal design in the syllabus or about memorizing your students' first names so that they feel a greater sense of belonging. And then faculty say, "Yes, like you've sold me. This is a good practice. But exactly when am I supposed to fit this into my schedule? Like I have already am, you know, working late or traveling between campuses because I'm an adjunct or because I have to work multiple roles because I do work at an institution that's, you know, lower resourced and maybe doesn't pay as much." So I think there's a real opportunity to offload some of the transactional work to make more time for the human. Which is definitely like a different narrative than what you would get from, you know, maybe like the most recent Mission Impossible movies where it's like AI takeover, global domination, we're all going to be irrelevant in a few years. Which don't get me wrong, I'm not an AI evangelist and I'm not here to say like that AI is going to be the perfect solution and there's a lot of challenges that it brings outside of what we're discussing today. But I do think that, like, we have an opportunity to do more of the mission-driven human work that I at least when I worked on campus wanted to do more of. Like, I didn't, I know that the advisors that I used to work with would have rather spent more time talking to students than dragging and dropping courses in Banner or Degree Works. They would have rather had that time to say like, "Hey, you know, Julian, what do you want to be when you grow up? Why did you come to this college? What made that a decision for you?" But they were often faced with the reality of a long line of students out their door waiting for them and that student who needed to register, and so it became more transactional like, "Okay, let me just get make sure you get into these courses." The challenge is really significant though with that, like, we know that students often pick let's say the wrong major on their application. If we're rushing the conversation then around what classes they should get into and don't help them course correct, they might end up having excess credits in their first semester or not seeing a connection to the college and not being retained. Not to mention from a staff sense of belonging engagement standpoint, it starts to feel really repetitive and not like what you've signed up for. So I think there's a lot of opportunities there. That one gets me really excited. Kaitlin: It is really tricky, right, to think about the layers here around, like, you mentioned earlier the vendor relationships. And the fact that each of these vendors, right, are also innovating and experimenting with AI and embedding AI in their own tools, and then what does it look like to start to think about how to holistically integrate tech systems that are also kind of changing and evolving in this landscape? And as, right, as you started today's conversation and saying using that word ubiquitous, right? Like it's everywhere. So what does it look like to be kind of in the center of this changing landscape trying to utilize these tools effectively, but the tools are changing? Right, and I appreciate what you just said about almost like well what can we start with? Where can we, like, where can we focus our energy on the things that matter most like engaging with students effectively? And can we draw, like, lessons learned from there or can we can we draw, like, places to start from the core of what matters most around students and engagement? Audrey Ellis: Yeah, I think you're really getting at at the real crux though, which is like if we don't decide what we want to use AI for, vendors will decide what we use AI for. Because every vendor is adding AI. That is how they will stay relevant in this moment. If you already have technologies, which you undoubtedly do, we all use technology in our day to day. And you don't take an active stance in this conversation and in your procurement and in your strategy, you will ultimately become a passive consumer of how vendors have decided you should use AI. And so I think that that is why it is so important right now to pause and think about what do you value about your job? What value do you provide that technology cannot, which is substantial in my opinion. Like, humans should absolutely still be at the fore of education and the driver. So then, then where are the biggest opportunities to leverage AI? And that's something that institutions who are taking a scattershot approach are not benefiting. Like, that exercise is not benefiting those institutions. And what we found is when we conducted our interviews, we had this heat map, I guess, that we asked institutions to vote for both where they have seen AI, where they are using AI, like from an org chart standpoint, but then also where they thought AI could have a lot of value and there was a there was a gap. Because I just talked about advising. Because it is a very obvious example of a place where AI could have a huge impact. And also, for what it's worth, advising is always the front line of every reform. So, you know, for better or for worse for the advisors from an initiative fatigue standpoint. But we also heard from a vast majority of our interviewees that strategic finance and financial aid are other areas where there's a lot of opportunity for AI, but almost no one is leveraging it. And so if we don't kind of demand or force the experimentation and the innovation in those areas, then we won't benefit from from it or someday, you know, the tools that we use to do our our financial aid packaging, for example, will roll out whatever they think is best for AI integration. And so I think there's a real opportunity to also work with vendors right now rather than just be kind of passive consumers of the AI washing, like whatever they're just embedding in their functionality. Julian: So my last job working for other people was as an administrator at a leader at a community college system. So my mind takes me to, okay, so what is working? What are examples of how this can be organized? Because, you know, you can be strategic even if you don't have a lot of money. And you can experiment and be thoughtful about how you pilot and grow and scale and and and drive change and policy and work with vendors. So are there in your research, in your travels, are there examples, structures that are working? You know, obviously the president needs to be the leader of leaders, but who typically is driving this work? And especially if you if institutions are thinking about it as both what we do on the learning educational teaching side and throughout the rest of the institution crossing to the admin and everything in in between? So I don't know, it's a lot to cover, but I'm curious to know if there are examples that stand out to you? Audrey Ellis: Well, ironically, there isn't like a monolithic AI lead in higher ed. That made our research really hard to be honest, because you're kind of like shooting fish in a barrel with an org chart. Like, I'm going to reach out to this person who I think maybe is in charge of AI and then they say, "No, I don't have anything to do with AI, talk to this person," it gets kind of kicked around. The alternative institutions are starting to assign or hire for like AI innovation leads, but I am kind of not fully in on that model. I don't think that it's I think a lot has yet to shake out in how that like AI or Chief AI Officer kind of role works. I think the risk just quickly is that it becomes kind of like "Oh, that is just that person's job and therefore it is no one else's." But with such a ubiquitous technology, it is everyone's job. And so what I usually say is we all need to be leaders in this moment and every supervisor should be thinking about what AI means for them and their direct reports. And that's why, you know, doing capacity building exercises like leveraging there are so many free AI training modules and content out there. Encouraging your leadership leadership broadly, being really like I said supervisors, to think about how AI could look in their unit is a really big opportunity and pretty low cost. I think that one very free next step that institutions can do is assess what their AI adoption currently looks like on their campus. So we developed a survey suite and I just recorded a long webinar about this, so feel free to put that in the show notes, but we developed a four part survey suite that includes a presidential reflection, leadership or department unit lead survey, an individual user survey, and a student survey. And the idea is that if you conduct all these surveys and I'll just interrupt myself to say I used to run institutional research office. So I'm not trying to blindly push surveys. I know that survey fatigue is very real. But AI is being used in offices that we don't know about in ways that are potentially very innovative or potentially very problematic. They may or may not be benefiting us as an institution and we don't know. So it's really important for senior leaders to get that kind of heat map view of what their institution looks like or their system. So Julian, I would say that is like the immediate next step. You can start with the rubric though. What I suggest is like take the rubric to your cabinet. Have everyone independently score your institution and then compare your scores. What does your VP of Academics think compared to your CFO and your CIO and how are you aligned? But then getting that more distributed look is just as important because, you know, I hear all the time about like, you know, the student workers who are also students and using AI in their work for school and then, you know, they already have the account set up and so they just start using this their current account to maybe do what their job is in their student worker role a little more clearly. It goes all the way down to, you know, frontline staff that could be using AI but also could be really creatively using AI and perhaps and I'm not saying do this in an audit or punitive way. So I think in addition to the survey, the most important secondary action leaders can take is getting really tight on like what is actually out of bounds from an AI use standpoint and then otherwise encouraging experimentation. So, you know, the institutions that are, you know, private, really well resourced, I've been kind of watching this moment unfold for the last three years. And I remember, you know, in the first six months of ChatGPT on the scene, there were senior leaders who full on banned AI and then there were others who said, "This is your kind of temporary notice. Do not upload FERPA protected data. Do not put, you know, confidential information into AI. Otherwise, experiment and tell us what's working." And that I think is another free action that's actually setting institutions apart right now as far as how far they've gotten. A lot of institutions that I've worked with have spent a lot of time making AI policies that by the time they get approved by the board are not relevant. And so, you know, I would encourage leaders to not overplay the policy angle and and think about how you might incorporate one or two potential additional lines in existing policies. Like AI isn't new. If you've used GPS for the last 10 years, like our technologies include AI already. So in theory our policies should for the most part cover the ways that AI rolls out. And let's not use it as kind of like a delay tactic anymore. Kaitlin: There is an element of this ongoing learning that I think it would be more comfortable if we could say, "Well, when I'm an expert in this, then I'll use it," or "When I understand it enough, then I'll apply it here." And there's this reality that that's not what we're facing and so, you know, I think it really is complicated, right, how to get comfortable with that as you're saying from just like a human development and capacity standpoint. Like how do we all like gain some comfort with that because the world keeps moving and our jobs keep, you know, every day we wake up into our jobs and so what does it look like to apply this ongoing learning mindset to something that I think it can feel a little uncomfortable on an individual level never mind an organizational level. Audrey Ellis: Yeah, actually from my initiative fatigue research, that is a really important takeaway is that below all of these institutional decisions or maybe like a history of failed initiatives or poor communication or mismanaged expectations, there's the human element where your stakeholders on campus are honestly just like "How does this affect me in my day to day and will I still have a job?" And it doesn't help that with AI that is also the narrative in our society and, you know, like there's a lot of fear mongering. And so that's why I say that every supervisor has a role right now because especially in the absence of a presidential statement around AI, every employee is going to look to their boss for signals around "Should I be worried right now? Should I take a growth mindset or a fixed mindset in this moment?" And that is not something to underestimate. Like if you have a growth mindset, you're seeing that you bring I think intrinsic value because of who you are and your your humanness and your mission drivenness. And then you are saying "How can I continue to do this better with this new technology?" If you have a fixed mindset, you're saying "As I am today is protected and so I cannot change or else what I am right now is as under threat, I guess." And I think that is very much like being rinsed and repeated in the public sector right now and so I think leaders need to lead by example. They need to say, "I am scared of AI too. I am trying to learn and you should learn; we will learn together. We will learn with our students and maybe from our students," rather than just being silent because I think that's when the real fear happens and then folks kind of freeze. Julian: It's so interesting because it does on one level harken to so much of what, you know, those of us who've been trying to reform education have been dealing with for years, which is career pathways, yeah, that happens down there, or workforce development, yeah, there's an office I think they're in that other building. And this idea of how do you just integrate this work in your everyday? And it's really scary when something this powerful has emerged. We have not experienced anything like this. And and I'm almost interested in as we wind down the conversation, you know, we want to hear from you again and more about how listeners can follow and continue to learn more and follow your work. I also like there's a part of me that like wants to talk to you again in six months, talk to you again three months later, talk to you again three months later because I think it could be a very different conversation, you know, that's just the reality we're in. Audrey Ellis: Yeah, and I know I would love to keep the conversation going. It certainly is only ramping up and is not slowing down. So on our website, t3advisory.com, there's an section or a tab that's called AI for Institutional Transformation. All of our resources are available to download and use on that page. That also includes our recorded webinars and upcoming webinars. I'll be presenting at a bunch of conferences this year and really happy to hear from folks if they want to continue the conversation. We hope to do a second round of this study, like you were just saying, Julian, like this conversation is not going away. You know, luckily the way I talk about it is constantly updating and being informed, but our actual data was collected last year. So I really hope that we'll be able to collect even more data formally officially in the coming months as a continuation of this research. And, you know, we work with a lot of institutions and systems on their AI adoption strategy, and we are also thinking about developing some solutions to support institutions with this in a more scalable way, so maybe we can check back in in a couple months. Kaitlin: That sounds great. Yeah, thank you so much for taking the time to connect with us today, Audrey, and to share this work and yeah, looking forward to remaining in touch. Audrey Ellis: Yeah, thank you so much for having me and really excited to be part of the conversation. Julian: Thank you. Kaitlin: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support, and a special thanks to our producer Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces.info/podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like, and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about Work Forces Consulting, please visit workforces.info/consulting for more details about our multi-service practice.  

Dr. Joy Coates, Managing Director of Post-Secondary Opportunity at Third Sector, discusses how to build systems that prioritize real-world results, such as higher wages and better careers, for all learners. Drawing on a 20-year career spanning business and government, she explains how to move beyond good intentions to actually change how public programs and budgets are used to support people navigating life transitions, including those returning home after incarceration or managing mental health challenges. The conversation explores how to make sure a worker's certifications and skills count wherever they go, putting more power into the hands of the individual rather than the institution.  Dr. Joy discusses the Nexus Method, a practical approach she co-authored with Nick Beadle, that leverages the regulatory concept of "advanced standing" to bridge the gap between skills-first hiring and traditional registered apprenticeships. Using examples from states like Alabama and Massachusetts, she highlights how businesses in industries like manufacturing can find and keep talent by making small, strategic changes to their hiring rules, such as removing unnecessary degree requirements. Finally, she outlines the vital role of local community colleges in connecting people in the community to the careers of the future.   Transcript Julian: Welcome to the Work Forces podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Julian: Kaitlin, one of the recurring themes on this podcast lately has been the need for a credential system that is transparent and easy to navigate—one where the skills you earn in one place actually count in another. And we've talked quite a lot about this recently with folks like Scott Cheney from Credential Engine and Amber Garrison Duncan from C-BEN. Kaitlin: We have. And today we're exploring additional strategies for moving from establishing the technical foundation to make these credentials portable to engaging different organizations and funding sources to build a credential landscape that puts these ideas into action for all learners. Julian: Exactly. And our guest today has spent her career making sure these systems actually work for everyone. Dr. Joy Coates is the Managing Director of Post-Secondary Opportunity at Third Sector. She specializes in taking different parts of our world—like schools, state agencies, colleges, employers—and helping them change how they use their resources so they can focus on what really matters: helping adult learners get into better careers. Kaitlin: Dr. Joy brings over 20 years of experience to this work, including senior roles at the Markle Foundation and the Tennessee Department of Education. She is also behind a new approach called the Nexus Method, which is really a practical way to bridge the gap between hiring based on skills and traditional apprenticeships. Julian: Welcome to Work Forces, Dr. Joy, and we're thrilled to have you with us today. Dr. Joy Coates: Good morning! I'm so excited to be here with you both. Julian: Well, we've given a little bit of your background, but we'd love to hear you tell us about your background and the journey that led you to your work at Third Sector. Dr. Joy Coates: What's wonderful about the experiences that I'm now having at Third Sector is it really was an opportunity—a culmination, if you will—of everything I've worked on for the past 20 years. Everything I've been fortunate enough to be in the room with as these key decisions are made in terms of education, economic development. So, a lot of my earlier work, when I was still in corporate even, I spent some time in investor relations for a real estate organization that was focused on what we were calling back then "triple bottom line," which meant the return on investor, green development, and then also the return for the community. As part of that work, I was over corporate social responsibility. So I was working with all these organizations around their compliance to make sure that women, vendors of color, and others who were underrepresented were actually getting these really lucrative development contracts in Boston. And that experience shaped me so much. And different board appointments I had as a result of that really helped me shift completely my focus into the nonprofit sector and really try to path in terms of constantly coming back to outcomes, constantly coming back to what outcomes and equity mean together. And so at Third Sector, we're always thinking about that. We're thinking about how everyone who has a seat in the ecosystem can not only be brought to the table, but roll that expertise up to the government so the government can make better decisions for their constituents and so that we can really see lasting systemic change in these critical areas. Kaitlin: I feel like that's a great segue. Could you tell us a little bit more about Third Sector and the work that you're doing currently? Dr. Joy Coates: So, I am the Managing Director of Post-Secondary Opportunity. Third Sector also has several other practice areas; we also have a practice area that focuses more deeply on workforce pathways on the policy side, things like WIOA and TANF and better using these dollars that already exist and having them repurposed to serve more people. We also have a behavioral health division, we have a diversion and re-entry division that supports folks coming back into the workplace and just really back into the general population after periods of incarceration or homelessness. And then we have an early childhood education practice area. And so I'm fortunate enough to be able to be in spaces with these folks and think through where all these critical intersections are. If you were thinking almost like wheels on a spoke, it's where are all the different pain points in the pipeline of a person's existence, a person who's moving in that cradle-to-career pathway, and then all the different stop outs. Where are places where people get off track? Are they getting off track because of a mental health issue, an incarceration issue, because education quality wasn't where it was supposed to be? And so at Third Sector, where we have this focus on outcomes-focused government and outcomes-focused contracting, it's more of—we know and believe that folk want to do the right thing, especially in these different government agencies that are already so taxed. And what we like to do is plug in and help them get from intention to practice so that these things actually happen in the way that they hope and envision. Julian: So, with that focus on outcomes and building more equitable workforce systems, talk to us a little bit about the connection then between credential quality and portability. How do you build an ecosystem where credentials aren't just high quality, but where they can really be carried across different systems? Dr. Joy Coates: So, certainly the portability question isn't necessarily new. In fact, it applies to folk, adult learners like myself—career adult learners who had a family and were working with different institutions of education depending on my schedule, my availability, and transparently what I could afford, right, in terms of different degree programs. And so when we think about the credential quality, what that really means is: what's the bearing this credential has on my future? What is the dollars and cents bearing? If I get this credential, realistically, how much more do I stand to make so that I can take better care of my family? And the folk who help make that decision, one, are the institutions of higher ed and the training providers that design them, but also the employers who really control the receptivity of these credentials in the field. And so when we speak about portability, we're really talking about how that information moves. From the learner who's actually putting in the work to get the credential, to the training provider, and then to the employer, and of course in some cases CBOs who may be providing things like career coaching, things of that nature. How is this information flowing across all these stakeholders that will ultimately have some impact on someone's economic future? But what's important about the portability is we are looking specifically at ways to put the power of that portability into the hands of the learner, rather than them being at the mercy of multiple different standards of transferability. And we know that's a tall order, we understand, but we know we're also not the only ones in this work. And so we heard you mention Amber Garrison Duncan a moment ago from C-BEN, who is a fantastic partner of ours and we really love the work that they're doing. While we have our own ideas—and we'll get into that, the recent paper we released in a few minutes—we also are really about amplification in terms of impact. We want to have the right partners and really do our homework to understand, hey, there are things that are out there that are working, but maybe we've got some leverage points in government or with other partners that other folk may not have in the field and vice versa. So how much more could we do together if we lined up on all those things that we all bring to the respective table? Kaitlin: So, you recently co-authored a white paper—which may be the paper you just mentioned—on the Nexus Method. And so for our listeners, could you please explain that paper, the framework that you outlined, and specifically how using the concept of advanced standing can bridge the gap between skills-first hiring and registered apprenticeship? Dr. Joy Coates: So, again, not new concepts, but concepts we're really excited to dig in on. So, first of all, it'd be remiss if I did not mention our co-author on that piece, which is—who is Nick Beadle, who some of your listeners may know of or you may know of certainly. And certainly after being in federal government for a number of years and being a journalist and things of that nature, Nick and I crossed paths several times at Markle, where we were really thinking—he was running Good Jobs and I was thinking about skills-first hiring and scaling that and all the partners who needed to be at the table. And so for this paper, one of the things we're thinking about at Third Sector and that Nick has also been thinking about is: what does the next iteration of apprenticeships look like? As we think about things like different forms of financial aid is either going away entirely or being collapsed, and pathways being a bit more overwhelming for folk. Again, to my earlier point: what are the things we already have that work well? So when we talk about the Nexus Method, we're really talking about policies and regulations that are already in place, like advanced standing and other things of that nature. Already, if we use them properly, they enable us to accelerate someone's career pathway in an existing framework. So if we're talking about a registered apprenticeship and the skills-first hiring practice of thinking about what experiences is this person coming in the door with that really ought to truncate that apprenticeship length in some way, right, just like you would do with credit for prior learning? So the advanced standing on apprenticeships, up until very recently—as recently as about a week and a half ago—had a cap. There was only so much advanced standing you could get. Now that cap has been lifted. So when we zoom back into what we're saying in the report is, if we take the best of skills-first hiring and the best of apprenticeship, we now have a more holistic way to customize how folk are able to advance their careers with these critical tools. And then the skills-first hiring practices—we call them practices because it's not just about recruitment and hiring. It's also about retention and how you set up within your organization your own structure for how somebody is able to move within your organization and ascend based on what they've already brought in the door, your ability to codify those skills against what your organization needs, and then your ability to kind of evolve, let their skills evolve in an organic yet targeted way throughout the life of the organization. So there's a way for you to codify those practices. And so when we were documenting this in the paper and pulling in language that we've heard from employers, including transparently some of their pushback on these pieces, it's employers and other stakeholders—but certainly we're talking about employers right now—employers want to do the right thing. Employers want talent. Employers want to have fair and equitable hiring practices that build a strong pipeline. The pushback comes from the noise in the field and the confusion over which strategies are the strategies and kind of being a little bit nervous about: I don't want to pilot this, it doesn't work, now it's affiliated with me. So what we're doing is taking existing research, one, for that grounding, existing policy so folk know that they don't have to recreate something, and then laying out an actual roadmap for how that works. So in follow up to the paper, we'll be developing some guides on how employers can actually do this in practice. And also we'll both be at various conferences, ASU-GSV and things of that nature, where you'll be able to at least come by and say hi, or if we're presenting—we're not presenting at ASU, we'll just both be there. But at the places where we are presenting, we certainly hope that folk will come and just talk to us because we, you know, we want to share this information. We don't want to make it seem like, oh, you have to have this special criteria to do it. The criteria is really desire to open up your pipeline and make that pipeline viable. And so we're trying to offer something clear and cohesive that anybody can use, but also understand that you do need some guidance and you do need some practical support on how to make that work regardless of your industry. Julian: So where is it working? You say a lot of what you do is about amplification, and it's—you've talked about the institutional level, you've talked a little bit about policy and with respect to the specific method you've written about with Nick Beadle, wondering too: is anyone doing this effectively? Dr. Joy Coates: In terms of the Nexus Method itself, it's a bit of a pilot; that's why we introduced the paper, we're inviting people to embark on this. Of course! But when we talk about apprenticeships, certainly, and you'll see like these pieces are working in places. So you see apprenticeships working very well in Massachusetts, Colorado, California; starting to see some of that evolution in Mississippi and Alabama. What we want to do is work with the states who have existing apprenticeship practices and existing employer flexibility around the skills-first hiring piece and begin to build cohorts where we can document the specific implementation of the intersection of these two practices. To our knowledge—I'm sure someone is doing it, but they're not calling it that, right? So we want to elevate, if they are doing it, call us, we want to talk to you. But if they're not doing it, we want to help them see that it actually wouldn't be as overwhelming as they think to do it. And so that's the excitement and energy that we're in right now: okay, we have something here. And we've had employers give us feedback directly on LinkedIn, commenting on our posts of "this is exactly the tension that we are wrestling with right now," especially in things like manufacturing and automotive. And so we know we can't do everything at once, so we would likely start in one of those two industries and begin to build and rapidly disseminate that evidence base so that others can adopt. Kaitlin: Building actually on that—what you're hearing from people, from employers around the articulation of the challenge and the need—what does it take to get that deep employer buy-in? Because as you said, right, it can be hard to commit to say like, let's try this pilot or let's try this newer approach. But what have you seen work in that respect, you know, where have you seen success in deep buy-in? Dr. Joy Coates: I think what works the best is doing your homework in advance to understand the industry. So for example, citing, you know, the Markle example when we were doing Rework America Alliance: we built these skills-first hiring kits with input that have subsequently been, you know, absorbed into JFF's portfolio on the skills space. Starting with the employer first to understand where their pain points are, trying to take as much of the burden off of the employer as you can from your space as a practitioner, but yet never losing sight of the fact that the employer is the one who actually has to do it, right? So you can do things like, you know, create a kit or download those hiring kits and use that with your employer that you're consulting with. You can actually host, you know, accelerator events, which Markle and JFF have done. Goodwill Easterseals in Minnesota has a large—I guess now the fourth year that they've been running these accelerators for employers. And what they do is they basically have engaged employers who are willing to give some of their time—not more than three hours, because we're talking about sometimes director, exec, and above level of folk who are coming—getting these folk in a room with other employers in a space that feels relevant yet non-hyper-competitive so they can talk about these real-world problems, know they're not the only one, know they're not being vilified, and then walk them through the steps it will take while also bringing in case studies of other employers who have done it. So it's building the trust, building the credibility, and at the same time being clear about the ease of replicability is really what the things that we see that work the best and that have had the most staying power in the coming up on a decade or so now since we've been engaging with employers in this work. Julian: So what is sort of the biggest "aha" moment for employers when they kind of see that this is working? Dr. Joy Coates: What I have seen as one of the biggest ahas is it actually doesn't take as long as they think it will is the first piece. And the other piece is they don't have to redo every single HR practice that they have; they just need to tweak the ones that they have to make them a little bit more flexible, right? So when you think about something like removing a degree requirement—certainly that's not applicable for every job; some jobs have degree requirements, like doctors, nurses, things of that nature because of the technical training that you need. But when we talk about hiring, promoting, and expanding roles and opportunities based on merit, everybody has that kind of baked into the way they do business just transparently. It's good business, you want to keep your people. So what I think that we see the light bulb go off with employers is when they realize, okay, I'm not doing everything wrong, but there are one or two places where I could potentially see exponential increase in retention and productivity if I made and committed to these specific changes. And we see relief. We don't see, you know, we don't see this regret of, oh my gosh, why didn't I do it 20 years ago, because people are really very much in the now. Everybody's under pressure with the current economy and things of that nature. We really don't have time to lament what could have been. You know, the thing that's the most active and most salient is folk realizing, okay, there is a blueprint, I don't have to start from scratch, I don't have to nix all my HR practices, and I actually do have the folk in place that can help me bring this thing to the next level without it sucking all my time as CEO, executive director, whatever the case may be. Kaitlin: I feel like that is one thing we've heard from so many guests, Julian, guests coming from very different perspectives in the—in the landscape of the future of work and learning, which is really like: start small, right, like don't try to take on everything at once. And I think especially as you alluded to, Dr. Joy, the—this really rapidly emerging, evolving, and changing landscape—it's like, where I think people want to know: where can I start because it can be really challenging to know like, how can I dive into this without, you know, even at moments of ambiguity and uncertainty? Julian: Yeah, I think that notion of starting small and iterating and, you know, it's a complicated landscape now but I still think that's kind of been a missing element. So often, especially with grants—and you know, I mentioned Markle, you know, with grants and publicly funded programs—where some a good idea, often a great idea, is put forward but it doesn't take root and it isn't baked in in a way that's going to allow it to kind of incubate and you can iterate and grow and really make it part of what you do. Dr. Joy Coates: Yes. I think the other piece too and what I think is a bit of a victory for the space is you're seeing the federal government, especially around apprenticeship, start—start contributing more heavily to pass-through funding that is meant to benefit and offset costs to employers in a way that you didn't see before. And I think that, you know, funding always kind of goes a long way you think about that more from the nonprofit standpoint. But even though we're not telling you to tear down your whole organization as the employer, we recognize there is impact, right? There's always some cost to making any kind of change, positive or negative in your organization. And so I do think it was a smart, bipartisan, potentially sustainable thing for the government to do to say, okay, we're going to release some—release some grants, we're going to have trusted intermediaries apply, but the folk who actually need to make the change stick, that's where we're going to push the lion's share of that funding. Now, certainly if you're a consultant, you might wish the funding was going a different way. But for the sake of the growth of the field, to see a significant and substantial investment in the employer and the way that they are taking up and changing practices, I think is—is an important shift to see. Kaitlin: So, as we begin to wind down this conversation, and you've already started to go there, but I'll ask the question explicitly: what are some practical steps that you can offer our listeners—whether they are employers, or educators, or workforce leaders—to help them better prepare for this changing credential landscape and their roles within it? Dr. Joy Coates: I think—well, the first step is always a bit of a mind shift as we talk about at Third Sector: are you open to this degree of change? And it doesn't necessarily mean: gosh, I'm underwater, everything's on fire, I'll try everything—I'll try any and everything, right? We don't mean that when we mean—I have heard that this targeted thing you are doing works and I want to know what the tangible steps are. So certainly, as with any thought leader in the field: our website, we have both the Nexus Method and the—The Future is Portable, which is more specifically around micro-credentials. So go to our website, www.thirdsectorcap.org, pull those resources down, reach out to folk. My contact info is in there, or if you have another trusted partner that is doing this work—we know we're not the only partner in this work—I think the first tangible step: make a decision. The second one: get the right partner to help you implement. And then the third one: have a strong sense of mutual accountability between yourself and actually the field of the change that you want to make. If you're in manufacturing and you know that there is, you know, a 28,000-some-odd gap in a particular role and you want to be at the forefront of closing that gap, then that's what you dig in on. You hone in on: this is the gap that I'm trying to fill. I've got, you know, a colleague at General Motors and she is focused on the recruiting of frontline employees. And when she and I speak, she says: I can take this framework and apply it directly to how I am recruiting these frontline manufacturing specialists at General Motors and then I can say, you know, these are something clear that I can do. Now, again, this is a colleague who has just read the paper and thinks it's great, it's not Ford signing off on us, that's not what I'm saying. But, you know, specific, tangible examples: what problem are you trying to solve, what partner do you need, and what's your real timeline? What are you really willing to commit to in terms of implementation? It won't happen overnight, but it won't happen at all if you don't have a more specific goal, right? And sometimes a partner like us at Third Sector could be the one to even help you set up the timeline. But I'd be willing to bet that many employers have their own timeline they're working against; the gap is they don't know how to get there. Julian: No, I think that's so true and they—so much of this ebbs and flows with economies and, you know, we're doing a bunch of work now in manufacturing with employers that are struggling to find—many that are struggling to find entry-level workers still. So, we know there's a lot happening and changing in healthcare and, you know, so there's it really is more about applying the methodology and working with the employers who have the need. Dr. Joy Coates: And I would if I can add a fourth, if we're not out of time. I would also say don't underestimate the power of your local IHEs, particularly if you're in a community like Boston or San Diego, San Francisco that has really strong community college networks that are providing not only a lot of this training, but a lot of like wrap-around services and helping folk get ready in some of the softer skills areas of this work. Because these are folk who can work as an intermediary for you in terms of understanding and identifying where that pipeline is. A lot of employers are not in the community, and this is not an indictment of those folk, but if you're not in the community and if you even feel like you can't be in the communities where your pipeline is, you need a partner that's rooted in that community and can help you not only get to those folk, but work with you to make sure the map between what they are learning and what you need them to know actually are integrated. Kaitlin: Absolutely. Well, this has been such an insightful—and practical—conversation. We really appreciate you joining us. As we wind down, how can our listeners continue to follow you and learn more about your work? Dr. Joy Coates: We will be doing a couple of follow-up webinars. If you're not on our mailing list, go to our website, www.thirdsectorcap.org, get on our mailing list. My smiling face is on the website under Post-Secondary Opportunity; click on that and if you don't get me, somebody will connect you to me. We are pretty active on LinkedIn, and it's one of the—and I don't know if y'all are seeing it, but I'm seeing quite a—LinkedIn is really turning into more of a gathering place, I feel like, in the past year or two where we're all just kind of going: "Hmm, how do we manage today's delight?" And folk are really connecting with each other on there. So I am on LinkedIn literally all day—not all day because I have meetings or whatever—but I'm easily accessible there; send me a request, send me a message. We don't have to connect all the way and I can either help you myself or give you some resources. But everything that we do, we usually post to LinkedIn. I will post it, Third Sector will repost it, Nick will repost it. And so as this work kicks off even more in the coming months, you'll see things from he and I about what's going on. And also his newsletter, "Jobs at Work" newsletter, has a whole plethora of connected issues that he speaks on twice a week, and so we would recommend that you engage with that as well. Julian: It's funny when you mention LinkedIn as a gathering place; I initially had this vision of like: yeah, used to be kind of like a relatively quiet bar or restaurant, and now it's just like booming, it's like overwhelming. But yeah, that's great and you see your posts and Nick as well frequently. So for sure, we will continue to follow your work and look to gather with you and, to echo Kaitlin, thank you so so much for taking the time to join us. We've really enjoyed this. Dr. Joy Coates: My pleasure! Really was a delight. Thank you both so much for having me, and thank everybody who's listening. Kaitlin: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support, and a special thanks to our producer Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces.info/podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like, and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about Work Forces Consulting, please visit workforces.info/consulting for more details about our multi-service practice.  

Amber Garrison Duncan, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Competency-Based Education Network (C-BEN), discusses the evolution of competency-based education from seven pioneering institutions in 2013 to over 600 institutions and 1,000 programs today. Drawing from her experience assessing co-curricular learning outcomes in traditional higher education and later as a grantmaker at Lumina Foundation, Garrison Duncan explains how CBE restores the promise of economic mobility by focusing on mastery of skills rather than seat time. She details C-BEN's systems-level work through initiatives like the Center for Skills and the Partnership for Skills Validation, which build consensus across K-12, higher education, and employers on quality standards for skills assessment and validation. The conversation explores how policy shifts like Workforce Pell and state-level innovations in Alabama, Arkansas, and Texas are accelerating the movement toward skills-based credentials, financial aid, and talent management systems. Garrison Duncan emphasizes the urgency of iterative innovation, comparing the current moment to the iPhone era where institutions must test and adapt quickly rather than waiting for lengthy pilot programs, and offers practical guidance for institutions to begin their CBE journey using C-BEN's Quality Framework while building authentic connections between learning outcomes and employer needs. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces Consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort, please check out our workforces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Julian: Today, we are sharing a Work Forces Rewind of our interview with Amber Garrison Duncan, Executive Vice President and COO of the Competency-Based Education Network, or C-BEN. We decided to revisit this conversation following C-BEN's recent release of "Governing Talent Marketplaces: A Guide for State Leaders" which C-BEN developed in partnership with the National Governor's Association. This is a milestone for C-BEN, providing a roadmap for how states can build the governance and data systems necessary to make skills-based hiring a reality. Amber has long been a leader in this space, and our podcast discussion explores the critical role competency-based education plays in creating more equitable pathways to opportunity. It felt like the perfect time to bring these insights back to the forefront. We will be back in two weeks with our next episode. For now, let's go back to our conversation with Amber. Julian Alssid: You know, Kaitlin, it feels like just yesterday, but it was actually over a dozen years ago now that we were helping to launch College for America at Southern New Hampshire University, which was one of the very first competency-based education models. And back then CBE, it felt like a radical experiment, you know, trying to prove that demonstrating mastery of competencies and not seat time in a course was the key metric to helping people advance their education and careers. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, it's true. And while it does feel like that was just yesterday, the competency based movement has come so far in so many years. While CBE is still viewed as an alternative, non traditional approach by some in the field of education and training, many institutions have and are continuing to holistically implement competency based models to go beyond the traditional credit hour and ensure a curricular emphasis on what learners can do with what they know, and as we think about the intersection of work and learning in which we're all operating, this movement has only been further strengthened as employers further focus on skills based hiring and learners seek to clearly communicate their skills and abilities in a competitive job market. Julian Alssid: Yes, and our guest today is with an organization that's been central to growing the CBE field, Amber Garrison Duncan is Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Competency-Based Education Network, or C-BEN. In her role, Amber spearheads initiatives to strengthen collaboration between education and workforce partners with a focus on competency and skill taxonomies and quality assurance before C-BEN, Amber spent eight years as a grant maker at Lumina Foundation, focusing on higher education success. And in her early career, she served in numerous Student Affairs roles at the University of Oregon, Florida State University, the University of Michigan, Hope College, and Texas A&M University. Amber, we're so excited to welcome you to the podcast. Thanks so much for joining us. Amber Garrison Duncan: Well, thank you for having me. It's so exciting to think back to those early days and just also how far we've come. So it's a good moment to reflect. And so thank you for this opportunity. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, thank you for joining us and for taking this moment in time to both reflect, and I guess maybe, you know, we'll spend a little time thinking about what's ahead as well. So I'm really glad to see you today for this conversation. Amber, and as we get started, we'd love to hear a little bit more about your background and what led you to your role at C-BEN, sure. Amber Garrison Duncan: Well, as you probably heard in my introduction, I had quite a bit of experience on a couple of campuses in higher ed, and are some of what I would call today our legacy institutions that have been around a long time and really are major leaders when you think about higher education. But in my experience there, I was doing assessment in the co-curriculum, and so I was not working in courses, and I was not working in time based measures. I was working on how students apply what they know and can do? How are they doing that and their co-curricular experiences or at work? And then at the University of Oregon, we were just getting to the point where saying, can we validate this and put it on a record for somebody? And so I was having that experience and also saw how hard it was to do, how much of a change it was to think about. Could people be learning outside of the four walls of this classroom, outside this desk, and where are they taking this knowledge? How would I know? And so from that just knew that also it was a lot of change, and was tired as a change maker, banging my head against the wall. So I said, Where else can I go? This is a systemic issue that, again, I worked at institutions across the country. Why is this so hard? And so then decided to pursue something that could support more of the system's change, and was lucky enough to be at Lumina for that which was a really transformative experience for me to see how the ecosystem is set up, why there's a lot of these incentives and barriers to change. And had the fortune to be leading a portfolio called Learning Infrastructure, and that was a portfolio focused on how we make sure that all high quality learning can count. And I learned there that the only way to maybe do that is, if we were to work in competencies and skills. Other countries around the world were figuring this out. We had to figure it out in the US. And luckily, there were seven institutions that said, Hey, we're already trying this Southern New Hampshire being one of those. And so C-BEN's origin story really is, how do we learn as quickly as possible from these seven institutions. Now that was back in 2013 when we were having that initial meeting and conversation. Today we have over 5000 members. There's no way to track fully and know how many CBE programs there are in the US, but we know there's well over 600 institutions that we know of, over 1000 programs. So it's kind of fascinating when we think about turning the ship in higher ed and how hard that is, and that in just 10 years time, we've gone from those early days to where we are now that really are proving out that CBE is a way to provide greater access. It's a way to ensure mastery, for that every learner gets the quality education and the skills they need. And then employers, again, are very much leaning forward to doing their skills based hiring by connecting with CBE programs. So that's like a quick evolution, and my history is just it's all tied up together in those two pieces. And so once I left Lumina, I just said, I really want to continue to be a part of this and continuing to help lead change. And so now I've been at C-BEN for four years, which, again, time flies, but a lot of really exciting progress to see and be a part of people's stories and watch our community grow. Julian Alssid: It is quite a quite a story, and you're right in the thick of it, Amber. And so looking back, you know, you mentioned the seven institutions initially. I'm pretty sure we were, we were one of them at College for America.  Amber Garrison Duncan: You were the home of C-BEN at SNHU, yeah. Julian Alssid: Looking back, what are some of the key moments in the evolution of CBE since those early days that led to the growth we see today? Because it really is quite remarkable. Amber Garrison Duncan: It is, it is. Also a couple of things, I would say is we also like to remind folks that CBE, if we look at the theory and science of learning this, goes back 100 years. I mean, we all probably, if we came up through education, we're big fans of John Dewey and thinking about all this. And so it's, it's kind of interesting as like, the old ideas that have new ways of implementing and scaling. And I think that was always our problem, as you looked at the movement in the cities, that people really again, University Without Walls, and we're really trying to do this, but again, it's hard to do this without new tools. And our tools of the moment were not really there. And so early leaders, as technology started to be used in higher ed to say, Can we do this async? Can we do this in a more flexible way? Can we, you know, again, recognize what people already know and can do and move them on a personalized pathway, not treat everybody as a cohort and teach them all the same thing at the same time, right? So as we started to see that world move, I think that's where CBE started to take hold, and it was a lot of early online learning institutions saying, hey, let's try this thing out where, yeah, we've got this moving async, and we know we can kind of personalize this. But what if we did this instead of again based on time and a module that, again, it's based on as soon as you master and being able to lift that is, again, it's no small task. But certainly, I think early movers were trying to reach people that they hadn't been able to serve before. They were trying to make sure that, again, what they were asking people to perform and know and do was relevant. Had payoff for those individuals and those residents in the way that we all hope, that it led to family sustaining wages, that, to me, it was about restoring the promise of higher ed that we really are about economic mobility, and we needed to try something new to reach people in ways that we hadn't before. And so that, I think, has been, as I hear over and over those 600 institutions talking about why they're trying to do this is they're trying to reach people who just wouldn't have maybe come to us before, wouldn't have been able to have that learning. And again, they want to make sure that if I ask you to spend that one Pell Grant, you get, or that Workforce Pell piece, or that that's your one shot for a lot of people. And I want to make sure it's worth it to you, and that you get, again, that economic return, and so CBE really is the solution to provide that. Kaitlin LeMoine: So building off your last comment there Amber, just around, you know, Workforce Pell and where we're headed, right? I mean, we'd love to hear, you know, what are some of the pressing challenges that you see as institutions and organizations seek to work? Work in this complex landscape, and where are there opportunities, especially around, you know, building a skills based ecosystem that involves all these parties, and really not only involves them, but I guess, allows them to collaborate and work together effectively. Amber Garrison Duncan: You know, I think Workforce Pell is a is kind of a bellwether in the policy incentives and things that will start to shift to reward and make sure that we're paying for things that have, again, return on investments, whether that's, you know, we've been working deeply in Alabama and helping them shift their credentials of value onto what are the skills, not just the labor market demand signal and the but what are the actual skills people need, and how do we make sure those credentials are delivering on those skills, and we're paying for that, not just a completion so again, I think Workforce Pell is starting to lean that way. I think more of the accountability measures are going to be headed that way, and quality assurance being tied to that. So I think that's a huge lever for the work that we're doing, and why people can kind of land on this as a solution to answer that. But again, it comes with a lot of challenges. We are, I say we go everywhere skills go. But if you look at where skills go, it's all the proxies of time that are attached to that, so the credit hour and the just getting into the like, where do I go find a person's skills? Well, I've got to go into the LMS, and I've got to hack the course, and then I've got to hack the assessment platform and the la, la, la, la. And it's like, holy cow. So it's definitely not without challenge. And I do feel like, for the first time, we have again, the market has shifted, and people are starting to say we do need to pay attention to how hard that is. Oh, we do need to say again, should we rethink financial aid based on time and maybe have competency based measures? States again are starting to lead the way in that again Alabama, California. Folks are trying to think about new ways to pay for learning based on skills and competencies and not seat time. We're starting to see Arkansas. Just this morning. I was just reading. They were like, we're not going to call it non credit anymore. It's professional skills learning. And like, why do we again have everything attached to credit? Non credit and hours and time and again. I think that we'll continue to explore, but I do think that it also represents a revisioning of the social contract and thinking about how we pay for things as a society at a moment in time when everything feels very disrupted. But how do we have the forum and the space to talk about what that means, and again, disperse funds, or have policies or have employer engagement in these ways that we all feel comfortable with. And so that's where C-BEN, we're spending a lot of our time. How are we building consensus? How do we reshape a system and not replicate things of the past? As we were getting on, we were talking about, we now have an apprenticeship track at our conference, and we have K-12 coming. And I think now that we're starting to see all these innovators are coming up, looking up and saying, let's not build systems the way that we had them before that we don't like. Let's connect them, because people are trying to move between them. And how do we use skills and competencies to do that? And again, find new ways and new paths in this kind of reimagining using skills as the foundation. And that's what gets me too really excited, but that, again, it's a lot of challenge that we're going to have to face, because now we're talking about admissions policies, and we're talking about dual enrollment, we're talking about things that we have we thought we solved, and now we're figuring out we didn't quite solve them, and we'd like to do better. But that is, is, I think the challenge of where we go next is, how do we build together so that as we're innovating, we don't run past each other, or we don't change one side of the system and not the other. People still need that lifelong learning journey, and we've got to be able to again collaborate to do that. Julian Alssid: So it really is this big systemic issue, and it sounds like C-BEN has been spending quite a bit of time thinking about this and trying to build and scale solutions that cut across the education and employer landscape. You know, I will say, while I agree Workforce Pell's, you know, certainly a bellwether. You know, it's not going to be a lot of money. How do we get solutions that have the employers and educators working in new ways at scale. And what do you guys see being done to advance this? You know, like we want to hear about your, you know, your new Center for Skills and the Partnership for Skills Validation. Amber Garrison Duncan: Yes, Workforce Pell, it's going to be a small amount, but it is our first dip in something different, right, a little bit, but still tied to the credit hours, so we still have to figure that out. But baby steps, baby steps, it is, it's a baby step, it's a baby step, it is a big baby step. But I certainly, through the Center for Skills, as we are observing, again, this growth. We said, how do we get to the intersection? And so. That's where the Center for Skills really comes in and says, if we're really talking about not just skills, as in, like, what's the sentence that describes skills we're talking about, what are the new types of evidence we need to base these policy decisions on? If we're saying people should be awarded or recognized based on mastery and demonstration of skill, for award of a credential. But we're also seeing again, employers saying, I want to hire people based on that mastery. I want to pay them. We're seeing a couple weeks ago, I was at Walmart and they gathered a lot of their peers, from Home Depot to Best Buy, saying, how do we restructure our performance based talent management structures. How are we incentivizing people? How do we pay people? How do we provide recognition for their skills? That's a huge shift. Again, collectively, for all of us to be having that conversation. But again, we can't just say, What do I slap a label on, but what's the performance evidence? And that's where the Center for Skills is trying to say, let's have that conversation at the intersection of what assessment means at the end of the day, and that our perceptions and the ways that we've traditionally done assessment has to shift and change. All of us, you know, if we're older than 20, probably are used to standardized tests and multiple choice, and those are great knowledge tests. Those are things we know we can do with great rigor and validity and reliability. But what we're talking about now is a new world where things are based on demonstration of skill. It's what I know, it's what I can do. What are the different contexts I can do that in? So it's a much richer, nuanced conversation, and that means we have to have new assessment tools and new ways of understanding that and that we shouldn't, again, back to this concept of like we shouldn't go build those separate from each other. If we're trying to all use the same evidence, how do we agree? How to create that evidence? What does quality look like? So that's really what the Partnership for Skills Validation is driving that consensus from K-12 to gray, employer to here, you know, we just released the common language. How do you just talk about this in the most common way possible, demonstration of skill performance. We're observing people and their behaviors at work, or we're observing people in their learning experience. How do we talk about it? And then again, what does quality look like, and how do we scale it? And that's what we're trying to drive that conversation and be that catalyst for consensus, so that, again, these things don't get created separate from each other, and then they don't work together. Kaitlin LeMoine: It's really amazing the work you're doing at all these levels, right? The systems it sounds like you're at the systems level. You're at the very tactical level of what does this look like to implement at one institution, or like, how do you change your technical systems to support this work, and then working across stakeholder groups and developing that shared language? I mean, it's an incredible amount of work happening simultaneously. I guess I'm wondering, how do you go about kind of speaking across your own team around some of this learning? Yeah, I imagine you're working at all these different levels and there must be some shared learnings, but also distinct things as well that maybe drive you in directions or directions you didn't expect.  Amber Garrison Duncan: Absolutely. It's like we, I'm just reflecting on we've, we've had to redo our own communications internally because of this, and part of this, I mean, the beauty of our team right now, you know, we talked about the field growing. Our team grew. You know, we had three people three years ago. We're now 25 people and these folks come from, from all the places we're working, right? So we have folks who come from. I built a higher ed program. I was a dean. I'm an instructional designer, I'm a state policy person. So we all have this lens internally that we bring to the problem solving. And so we really are solving it from every angle but, but we have to follow our own advice and internally go, what did you learn from that project? What did you learn? How are we connecting this up? Did you go let so and so, like we learned this from this institution, please go let their state policy maker know, because it is the full systems change and trying to follow and learn from each other as fast as we can, so that we can either reflect that back out to the field or again, help connect people who are trying to solve a common problem and may not realize that they're actually friends in the movement, And they should know each other, and you know, they would go further faster if they were to again resolve the policy barrier at the same time that they're building their program. So it is a unique moment to do that, but it does take just as much to work internally within the organization as it does to push this stuff out and to be able to support people on the ground and in the spaces that they're working. But I think that's unique in that we don't just do policy, we don't just do practice. We are really saying, Where do policy and practice meet, and how do they become truly informing each other over time. Julian Alssid: Amber, are there particular places where you're finding the most traction in kind of spreading the space? Putting the word and the kind of cross pollination work.  Amber Garrison Duncan: I do think some of the states we've been able to work in have just been tremendous partners to us. Alabama, again, I think, is our most visible support of a full state movement to competencies and skills across the full lifelong of learning, all of that being then represented out in the talent triad so that every employer at every citizen, citizen in the state can participate in a skills based transformation, certainly partnering then with Arkansas and their launch program. But also just, I would be remiss to say KCTCS and our early they were one of the early seven institutions as a system, they continue their great work and and, you know, we just supported the Kentucky CPE (Council for Postsecondary Ed) to build a competency model that takes their K-12 profile of a graduate and extends that up into the associate's degree and the bachelor's degree. So again, you start to see all of these institutions that have been innovating now impacting their systems. You know, we have TBR which has three staff. Tennessee Board of Regents has three staff focused on CBE build out. Those are tremendous amount of change. And again, it shows, I think, a desire to say, how do we solve this on the ground? But we know systems change is hard, and we have to have our systems changing alongside this and working together and just states taking leadership. I will say too, we have a lot of our legacy institutions coming to the fold. University of Kansas, huge leadership in building CBE programs. We just worked with them to launch a research journal for CBE so you could see, even the folks who maybe we wouldn't assume would be at the table, you know, are at the table, University of Nebraska, Lehigh University redesigning their first year experience for engineering students based on competency. So lots of, again, folks coming to the table who you'd be like, oh yeah, I would assume that. But also some folks, you're like, I never would have thought. How cool, you know. So that's pretty fun to see. Kaitlin LeMoine: That's great. I guess you're taking us in this direction anyway, Amber, but I'll ask the question explicitly, what are a few practical steps you would recommend that our audience can take to become forces in supporting the growth of the competency-based education movement. And please feel free to take this question to the systems level, nitty gritty, wherever you want to take it. Amber Garrison Duncan: We have kind of begun to think about CBE as not just a pedagogy, but a way of thinking about what we do, no matter where we're doing that work. And I think that's why, again, we have folks coming from research to policy to tech to whatever is that? What are we trying to really build? Is that that we want people to be able to engage in a learning experience that is authentic and real and based on what we know about how people learn that's a model, or I want to think about against being so outcomes driven, that whatever I'm asking people to engage in actually gets them where they want to go. And that's where the connection with employers, and it just leads you to this place where you're saying, Where am I the folks I'm serving? Where are they coming from? Where are they trying to go, and what am I putting in the black box here so that they can get there? And that our policies and structures should reinforce that, not again other things that we've used in the past. And so we just are, we'll be releasing a math pathways project where we sat down and said, What is, what do people have to know and be able to do around math today? Well, in that project, it just led us to the faculty, Gen, Ed math faculty, who said, I never sit down with an employer before. I had no idea. That's what nurses did with math today. But because this is an orientation to how we think about learning. We have to start with the employer, and then we're coming back and saying, okay, now that I know that again, what is it that I then help somebody know and be able to do? And how do I shift that? So it really is transformational and just a process of thinking. And then I've said to a friend once, it's kind of like in the matrix, where you're like, You take the blue pill, and you're like, I can't see it. Like, okay, this is how learning should look, and this is how it should happen. Is that it should be relevant to where I'm trying to go again, it should be flexible. Should mean something to me, and it should be applied. And that's, that's what CBE is. Julian Alssid: So Amber, I've done some poking around the C-BEN side, which looks great, and it's chock full of good information. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Amber Garrison Duncan: A couple of things, I would say is one on our website, become a friend of C-BEN. It's free. Gets you to make sure that you have a newsletter and access to a network and community of people who are trying to work on all these issues and problem solve together. So that's a very first easy step, low hanging fruit. And then the second thing I would tell you to start with is look at the Quality Framework. Our Quality Framework is, as far as we know, the only one exists in the world. We have people come globally who say, I found your Quality Framework. We don't have anything like this in Saudi Arabia, or we don't have anything like this in Singapore, or we don't have anything like this. And so we find people starting there and saying, What does quality look like? Because if I'm going to innovate, I want to make sure I'm doing that with quality. And then the other piece, I would say, is take that and then go try to do it in new ways. We always say, too, there's not one way to do CBE, because your learners are different, your employers are different, and that is an okay thing that is that's very hard for us to get out of the mindset of an education where it's like, well, there's a this response and this intervention should look like this, and it's like, that's not we've not found out to be true. And so take that quality framework, try it out, but start somewhere. This is the thing we know. This is a transformative journey. This is not a quick, quick fix. This is an 18 month fix. But once you work that muscle and you start, it's kind of like a workout program. Start the workout program. Just keep going and showing up every day and solving for that next problem, and you will be transformed at the end of it into something that is again, more relevant to learners and employers. And we're seeing enrollments go up. We're seeing great outcomes for individuals, but you have to get on the road, and I would say, the sooner you get on the road, the better. Again, we're not seeing the slowdown. We're actually seeing it accelerate. There are now, again, policy. We're just talking with all the Texas people. Texas legislators passed a House Bill 4848 that said every public system of learning has to have at least one CBE program in certain in-demand fields, and they have to have it in a year. So folks are again, getting on, which is kind of scary. That's scary because that's fast. That's really fast, but I think that is, again, a bellwether of people are tired of the status quo and need something different from us, and so we're going to have to do something so just grab the Quality Framework, get to work, trying some things. Let us know how we can help. Kaitlin LeMoine: Really appreciate that. Amber, I think you know, I feel like I'm so struck by the number of conversations we have on this podcast that end with, start small, start somewhere. Let's make sure we get going, even if you don't have everything worked out, because if you don't get started, you can never really move the needle or see where the points of pain are, or see where the points of innovation are. So really appreciate that call out. It feels so critical, especially at this moment in time where, yeah, like you're saying, things are moving very quickly.  Amber Garrison Duncan: I always, and this is probably, like, silly, but I always use the example too, of the iPhone in higher ed. We have been so research oriented. Again, I got to try it and pilot it and learn from it for three years. We don't have three years. We have an iPhone moment of get something out there, collect data. Change. Change every six weeks, if you need to. But that is the pace and the urgency of now that is going to require us to work differently. We can't wait for five year program reviews. You better be getting in there with those employers. And in that Alabama example, for the Credentials of Value, we're meeting quarterly to review labor market demand and change updating skill sets. So that's again, when I talk about pace of change, it's going to feel very chaotic, but use your data and insights to ground you and do it more frequently than we've ever done it before. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, thank you so much for taking the time to join us today. Amber for this conversation. I mean Julian, I think I think I can speak for us both when I say this topic is very near and dear to our hearts. And you know, we're so excited to have been able to take some time with you to get the current and future state of the field, lay of the land. Really, really appreciate this dialog.  Amber Garrison Duncan: Absolutely. Thank you for having me, and you're always a friend of the movement, you you are. You are the sparks of the movement. So it's been fun to reconnect. Julian Alssid: Thank you so much, Amber, really, really do appreciate the reconnect. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell, if you're interested in sponsoring the podcast, or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info, forward slash podcast. You can also find workforces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends, and if you're interested in learning more about workforces consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.  

Scott Cheney, Chief Executive Officer of Credential Engine, discusses bringing transparency to a credential marketplace that has grown to over 1.85 million unique credentials representing $2.3-2.4 trillion annually—a tenth of the U.S. economy. Drawing on over 30 years at the intersection of workforce development and education, Cheney describes how the explosive growth in micro-credentials and digital badges creates navigation challenges for learners and employers. He explains Credential Engine's Credential Transparency Description Language (CTDL), a data format enabling disconnected systems to communicate like travel booking platforms do for airlines and hotels. The conversation explores state-level implementations in Arkansas, Alabama, Tennessee, Texas, and Florida, where credential registries help workers compare programs, costs, and outcomes, and innovative work with AACRAO to credential the skills of 40 million Americans with some college but no degree through verified digital badges. Cheney emphasizes that digitization empowers learners to own and share credentials rather than relying on paper transcripts, urging learners to request digital formats, educators to issue them proactively, and highlighting federal support for talent marketplaces that will transform credential navigation. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our workforce consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education, industry, and workforce development all across the country.  We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Julian Alssid: Kaitlin, we talk a lot on this podcast about skills-based hiring, competency-based education and helping learners translate what they know into career opportunities. But there's a fundamental infrastructure challenge underneath all of that. How do we actually make sense of the credential landscape? Kaitlin LeMoine: It's true. The ecosystem is incredibly fragmented. We have traditional degrees, certificates, badges, licenses, apprenticeships, and industry certifications. And those are just the formal credentials. Many of these systems don't effectively speak to one another and learners and employers alike struggle to understand what different credentials actually represent in terms of skills and competencies. Julian Alssid: Right. And it's not just about quantity, though the numbers are staggering. It's about transparency and comparability. If I earn a credential in cybersecurity from one provider, how does that compare to a similar sounding credential from another? What skills does it actually represent? And how do employers make sense of all this when they're trying to hire? Kaitlin LeMoine: And those types of questions bring us to our guest today. We're joined by Scott Cheney, Chief Executive Officer of Credential Engine, the organization working to bring transparency to the credentials marketplace. Scott has spent over 30 years at the intersection of workforce development, post-secondary education, and economic development. Before founding Credential Engine, he served as Policy Director for Workforce, Economic Development, and Pensions for Senator Patty Murray and the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Prior to his work on Capitol Hill, Scott formed his own consulting firm working with states, companies, foundations, and think tanks on education, training, and employment issues. He has also held positions with the National Alliance of Business, the American Society for Training and Development, and the US Chamber of Commerce. Scott has also been involved in learner and worker mobility efforts globally, including serving on the Board of Directors of the Velocity Network Foundation and on the Strategic Advisory Committee of the Groningen Declaration Network. Julian Alssid: Scott, welcome to Work Forces, we're thrilled to have you with us today. Scott Cheney: Thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be here. Appreciate the opportunity. Kaitlin LeMoine: So as we dive in today, Scott, I know we gave your bio, but please tell us a bit more about your background and what led you to Credential Engine. Scott Cheney: Yeah, the background is not necessarily a clean line. So, you know, we talk about pathways, we talk about how do people find their way to certain places. I can't at all guarantee that any one thing led to my being here. Other than it just being a really different and unique opportunity to have an impact not just across the education and training ecosystem here in the United States, but to really think about how do we use and manage information about offerings across the globe. And how do we actually have better comparability, not just of a... to your example Julian, a certificate in one field by one provider, but a degree in the same field by a different provider and a certification. And then how do we do that when we're looking to support mobility of individuals across national lines. So it was a little different than anything I'd ever done because it's a very technical field, but it was very much in line with this interest in how do we improve education and workforce and training for people. To do it, it always got me very frustrated working in the Senate and then dealing with this very deconstructed ecosystem, we think along very artificial lines about education and training, right? We think about, oh, this is K-12. And then that's even primary and then secondary. And then you get into workforce and higher ed and we organize our thinking around largely federal funding streams, right? That's a higher ed, you know, kind of issue. That's a workforce issue. That's a Perkins issue. That's a, you know, Pell or a TANF issue. And people don't think that way. People think about what do I need next to get me the better job and to advance myself. And I don't care how it's funded, I don't care who offers it. I want to know it's going to be effective for me. And that's what this organization is really trying to dive into. Julian Alssid: So Scott, just recently you published your annual report, counting credentials, I guess counting credentials 2025. Um, which, which provides an update on the credential landscape. Please, if you will, share some of the findings of that report and particularly interested in hearing and knowing any surprises that emerged for you. Scott Cheney: Yeah. So we produced this one in 2025, the one that we did previous was in 2022. Um, it's a lot of work. We do it, we do it periodically. And, and one of the findings, the very top level finding is that we have available in the United States a little over 1.8 million unique credentials. So that is a staggeringly large number, but it would be helpful to just do a little bit of explanation about what's in there. First of all, when we use the term credential, oftentimes people think about a credential is one bucket of things and then there are degrees, right? We don't use the term credential that way. We use the term credential to mean anything that is intended to represent what you have earned and learned and can apply in some additional space. It could be further education. It could be employment. It could just be for self-satisfaction, right? That you're you're doing it because I'm a history buff and I'm not looking to be employed in history, but I went and took a degree or got a certificate in, you know, medieval history because I like it. And so when we think about it that way, and we think about also breaking down a history degree from West Texas is different than a history degree at the University of Washington is different than a history degree at Central Florida. And it's not because history is fundamentally different. It's because the unique sets of skills that you earn, the professors have different specialties. The marketplace into which you're going to use that credential might be different in each of those places. The costs are different, right? So we categorize each of those even though they're in the same field of study as separate credentials. So one is that we just count everything and we really want to help people understand. So it's a very large space. But the more interesting finding is that the growth in non-degree in the short-term credentials, and in fact, you can even get down to—and we're seeing more credentialing of single skills or small groupings of skills that are just what that individual needed, maybe because an employer said, we've got a new piece of equipment and I need you to go get these three additional skills to know how to run that equipment, and we're going to certify that you've got those skills and we're going to recognize that as a credential. And increasingly that's being done through things like digital badges, where you're not taking a full even a certificate program. You're earning those specific skills and once you've mastered them, they're being credentialized. So we're seeing this massive growth in very discrete skills gains and being issued as a credential and that's a lot of the growth we've seen. We were um, just over a million credentials in 2022. We did a much better count of these digital badges. And so the numbers now around 1.8 million. And it's offered by about 135,000 different providers. So credentials are being issued by any number of employers, of nonprofits, of museums, you know, traditional education sources. So it really is becoming a very democratized kind of ecosystem that we're in. And because we're doing a lot of this now as digital credentials, we're able to recognize learning as it's happening and empowering people with more information about their skills, their capabilities, than we've ever been able to do before. Kaitlin LeMoine: Scott, one thing I've been quite struck by reading the counting credentials 2025 report and then also just hearing you talk about, you know, sort of your kind of didn't expect to be in the technical element of this work. And I don't know if when you said technical, you also meant technological, but I'm struck by, you know, the need for data transparency in particular and how to build that foundation and that infrastructure. Especially as you said, right, like if you're comparing one type of program across institutions, how do we make sure that that all of this information speaks to one another, that we're all using the same information. You know, I loved the idea of um, in some of your writing you've talked about solid data, I like that acronym around structured open linked interoperable and durable. But just would love to hear more there because I think it's like it's a really complex and I think sometimes a hard space for people to really get their minds around including myself. Scott Cheney: So it is and it isn't, right? The education world has not really operated in this way. Uh, and honestly, the other number from our counting credentials report is we in this country spend somewhere around $2.3, $2.4 trillion a year on um, efforts to help people obtain credentials. Could be in what we spend in K-12. It could be what parents shell out in tuition for higher ed. It's, you know, federal, state and local funding. It's employers, you know, what they spend internally on their own training. And that is of a, I think we're at about a $21, $22 trillion economy right now. So it is a tenth of the entire economy. It's massive, right? And yet we don't really think in this sector around this idea of transparency and data interoperability. But for comparison, you would never assume that we could live without Expedia and Travelocity and Kayak. You would hop in your car and not use a a navigation tool, Apple Maps or Waze or something. But those can exist because those sectors have all agreed we're going to use a common data infrastructure. So that every airline, every hotel, every restaurant uses the same kind of data format. So that Expedia can reliably pull information and share it with you, that you're actually going to book a Marriott and it's actually going to be a king size bed, right? So what we're trying to do is the same thing for the education and training marketplace here in the country and then working to make this possible globally. And we do that through as as you pointed out, a data format that is structured, meaning that we know that this term means this thing. And if you publish a term, you're saying I am a Marriott or I am Ivy Tech. It's open and that's really important. We don't want this data to be closed off to public use. We don't want it to be owned and behind paywalls. This is a public good. We want this information to be open and accessible to anybody, anytime. It's linked. Again, linking, you go on the web right now, you can link between all these different things. The hyperlinks allow you to search and explore and that is just a modern data format. And so this information needs to be the same. Interoperable. So interoperability just means that if you say something is a credential of a PhD in psychology from Purdue and you take that information and you want to share it with the employer, that the employer can read that information and know that it's true in their system as it was true when Purdue published the information. So it's just a truth and that that consistency. And then durable is that it lasts. We can always find it. It's always going to be good. Whether you're talking about my degree that I earned in 1988 or information that's needed now as I'm looking for a new job. So that information is going to last. We happen to do that at Credential Engine using a data schema that we call the credential transparency description language. It is the data schema that we helped to create back when we were founded. And it is a solid data format. It does all those things that we described. It just happens to be the one and we developed it because nothing existed like it. There was no way to do this back when we founded the organization. So we were founded to create this data language. So when you think about it that way, and you think about oh, well of course I can use Waze to drive across town. Of course I can use Expedia to book a vacation. And then you say, why can't I compare and build a pathway for myself from high school through my own learning into community college onto a degree onto an industry certification? Because all that information sits in different repositories using different terms. And we're trying to change that. We're trying to bring all that information into a common language so that you can build your own pathway. I oftentimes say, we make it easier to book a vacation than we do to help you find your way through this credential landscape to get the right skills, to get a good job, to be able to afford the vacation. And that's just wrong. We need to make it easier to navigate your education and employment pathway than it is to book a vacation. Julian Alssid: Yeah, indeed. So bringing us back to the report for a moment, I'm really interested in, you know, I too was struck by that massive jump of crossing the million mark of digital badges and online certificates. And I guess I'm wondering, are we... from where you sit, are we how would you characterize this in relation to the traditional degrees? Are we are we are we at, are we approaching a tipping point of sorts? You know, are we, do you see, do you see these badges effectively, these badges and certs being stacked into broader programs? Is that happening yet? Scott Cheney: Yeah, so let's take a second and just clarify a few things. One, we don't actually know if from 2022 to 25 there was just a growth in the number of badges out there. We just were able to get a better count on the badges that exist. So it's quite possible that in 2022 there were actually, you know, that our number may have been one and a half million and it grew to 1.8. It may have been 1 point we don't have the longitudinal data on the badges. So I can't say for certain if it was growth. The second thing to understand about digital badges is that it's not just happening in the short-term arena. A lot of universities digitally badge their degrees, right? And so you're just a digital badge is a way of carrying the information. It's no longer having to go get the paper transcript and the paper degree and hanging it on your wall. It's being given to you in a digital format. And so digital badging is happening across the entire spectrum of education and training and all these different kind of credentials. It's just that you can create a digital badge and issue it very easily. And it can be done really easily for a short-term program. So we are seeing a real growth in digital badging and the digitization of this entire marketplace is fabulous. Right? It is a game changer unto itself because it means that I don't have to go pay $20 or $100 every time I need a copy of a transcript from the place I went to. I don't have to, you know, I can carry that information myself. I earned this degree. I earned this certificate. And the provider of that is awarding it to me. Maybe as paper. That's fine. I'll keep the paper. But you're issuing it to me in a digital format as well. And that digital format is then something I can own and it has a verification behind it, right? So it is empowering in ways that we've never been able to empower people before. So we strongly encourage every provider of every type of credential to move to a digital format, right? And that is a game changer. Because now we can also share that information more easily with potential employers. And employers can verify that Scott actually did earn these things from these providers. And you can change that whole dynamic of the interactions and the transactions that an individual can have and they can do it in a secure way. So we're really excited about that move to digitization and as I said before, it means that we can actually do a better job of capturing those discrete skills that are earned. You know, it could be as simple as, and I'm not saying that being a teacher is simple, but oftentimes you might get a principal observing a teacher and noticing that they had really, really good classroom management of a difficult situation. Right? That teacher didn't go back to school. That teacher displayed a set of skills in a classroom in front of a known authority who can then say to the teacher, hey, I'm going to issue you a digital badge because you handled that situation really, really well. And I have the authority and the ability to recognize your skills, to verify that you actually applied them and have them, and use them in a meaningful context. And I'm going to issue you a digital badge. It could be that simple. But that's a powerful thing for a teacher to be then be able to say that yeah, I was recognized and it was rewarded to me. It wasn't just the principal saying hey nice job in there and then forgetting that she said it to me or he said it to me a year later. No, I have proof of this. You saw my abilities to do this and it was issued so that is a game changer in so many ways. So this digitization is more than just one technical piece of it, it is an empowering piece for individuals everywhere. Kaitlin LeMoine: So Scott, as we've discussed, right, this work requires bringing a lot of people together to make these otherwise fragmented systems interconnected and working well together. Curious to learn more beyond the report around you know, how does Credential Engine help to support and drive those efforts? I would love to hear a couple of examples to illustrate this because I think it's like so much of this is in the details and it's super challenging work to bring these stakeholders together and make this work happen. So would love to hear more. Scott Cheney: That's a great question. And you're right. We have a a highly fragmented ecosystem in the country. So when we think about where information lies about this credential ecosystem, it's with certainly the frontline providers of them. It's with state agencies that oversee them or maybe fund them. It's with third party accrediting or qualifying bodies. It's with labor market information shops that might generate the earnings and employment outcomes. It's with employers, you know, who might say that yeah, those are the credentials that we want and these are the credentials and skills that we need inside this inside our company. So it is and that's just a smattering of examples. So let me give you two examples of how this might work. So Arkansas, a state level kind of application. Arkansas has a very aggressive, very well-organized initiative being run out of the office of the Chief Data Officer and under the direct kind of oversight of the Governor. So a centralized effort to bring very comprehensive information together to be able to help individuals see the entire landscape. Not just of what they have or what they can earn, where they can go to get things, but to also be able to store what they have earned in a credential wallet into a learning and employment record. And then being able to compare what they've earned with where they can go to get new skills, to what employers are actually looking for. And doing all of that in a digital platform and a talent marketplace, essentially as the administration is now talking about these things. So we are helping them build not only a credential registry, a common verifiable source of truth about every credential that's available to Arkansans and how to piece all those together. But we're also building for them a repository of support services that are available both through educational institutions—does that community college have a food pantry, do they offer counseling, do they have tutoring, are they on a bus line, do they have child care—but support services also from other providers in the state so if the community college doesn't have something but someone else nearby does, you can still find that. So all of that information is going to be available in this open data format in this credential transparency description language. And the state is combining that with lots of other information about what employers want, about you know other available services and they're putting this into platforms that can help individuals navigate. Julian Alssid: May I just jump in on that example for a sec, I'm just curious the state examples are impressive and Arkansas sounds pretty sophisticated. But you know of course people and jobs cross state lines. And so how do we ensure that you know a state like Arkansas' data doesn't become an isolated island of data? Scott Cheney: We're working really hard to have the same data format being used in Alabama, with Tennessee, with Texas, in Florida. There are about 35 states right now that are working with us in some manner to to bring this data format to to their systems. And then we're also seeing the the federal government and the administration not only talking about the need to build credential registries in every state, but about the need to have the information in those registries be in that structured, open, linked, interoperable, durable format. So we're seeing really good support from and embrace of this from the federal government onto state governments and into systems and institutions. It is a very big lift, right? Like I said, there's 135,000 providers of credential information. But if we can focus the work at 54 states and territories and we can get the federal government to say, yes, this is the way we should be moving in our work nationally, then Arkansas is not an island, right? Arkansas is simply one stepping stone of a person's pathway that they can traverse. The other example I was just going to share quickly is one that we've been working on with the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers. We know that there are over 40 million people in this country that have some college, no degree. So we've been working with AACRAO, the registrars, and a number of institutions to say, let's figure out what the skills were in the courses that an individual took and that they passed and let's extract those skills and be able to issue a digital badge, a verifiable credential for the skills that someone earned because they did earn them. They just couldn't for one reason or another complete the degree that we've held up as the holy grail in this country. But you did go to school, you did go to college, and we should recognize and award you the skills that you earned. So we've been working on a project that allows us to extract the skills from those courses that Scott may have taken. And issue a credential of those skills by the institution. And the institution stands behind, yeah, Scott came, he took these 10 classes, he passed them. We're going to assume that because he passed them he actually earned those skills. And here is a credential. We hope you come back. We would love to have you come back and finish. But and so that's something that's not at a state level. That's an institution saying, we want to award and recognize what Scott earned while he was here. And that can be done by any institution that wants to raise their hand to say it's a different way for us to recognize and to engage with our student population. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well and I would imagine too, right, I mean that there is an encouraging aspect there for the learner too, right? Of like, I did, I actually did earn something, it may not have been the full degree, but here's all the skills and competencies and the knowledge that I acquired and here's how I can show it. It's verified in the world, right? Scott Cheney: What a great email it must be that you went to these classes five years ago and your institution is writing you and saying, hey, we'd like to recognize what you did earn while you were here. That's a really and and we're not actually going to charge you for it, right? We can just issue you a digital credential. And that's a wow, it makes me actually want to maybe reengage with that institution, right? And and so there's just positives all around. It helps the economy. It helps that individual. It helps the institution. So yeah, we're thrilled by that work. Kaitlin LeMoine: So thinking about like, you know, kind of as you're saying right, where we're headed, where we'd like to be with so much of this work. I think you know one thing that has stood out to us and our work over the last few years is just how fast skill needs are changing in the economy. And so just curious to hear Scott from your perspective, how do we help really learners and employers, I mean really kind of stakeholders across this landscape navigate the value of these credentials when there are shifts happening so quickly? What are your thoughts there? Scott Cheney: So I think the first thing is I would say is I would encourage anyone, any provider of credentials to move to an issuing of of whatever is being awarded into a verifiable credential format, into a digital format, right? Let's begin to have a full adoption. And it's moving that direction, but we can speed this up, right? Those platforms are out there, it's not hard to do and and so we would encourage that everyone starts to to issue these digitally. And then to make sure that you're issuing them to an individual in a way that they can actually hold and and secure and use, right? They may choose to add it to their LinkedIn profile. They may not be in a state where there's a ready accessibility to a learning and employment record platform yet, we're seeing more of that coming. Again, part of what the administration is doing in these talent marketplaces is to encourage that states and systems create both credential registries but begin to issue learning and employment records. And to help employers produce job postings in a skills-based format. So a skills-based job description generator is the third piece of what they're calling their talent marketplaces. If we do all of that, so just thinking about this now not from the individual side, but things that institutions and states should be doing. They should be going down this road. They should be actively working to transform how they issue credentials, how they're issuing them to a learner, and then how employers can make the connection between what they need and then what a learner has. What a learner needs to do is to ask for their credentials to be issued digitally, right? Go to their to their provider, whether it's a community college or a Goodwill or whoever it may be. And say, thank you, this piece of paper is wonderful, can I get that credential in a digital format? Can I hold this differently so that I can actually have control of it and be able to share it because I want to make sure employers know what I've earned. So there is an advocacy piece that learners and students should be taking and should be acting on. It's a hard thing for a learner to do, right? To to say to the to the registrar or the admissions officer, yeah, that's that's great thank you, but can I get it in this format. But the more that we hear it, the more we do it, and the more they hear it, they hopefully will be acting on it. I will say that it's wonderful that organizations like AACRAO, who work with the thousands of registrars and admissions officers around the country, are leading on this issue. They are pushing this field and trying to help institutions adopt these formats. So the more we have this information there, the more easily we're going to be able to navigate it. We're going to be able to connect the skills that you have with the skills that are out there with the skills that that employers need. That sounds a little too good to be true, right? But we've made progress. I can tell you in the nine years that I've been at this work, at this organization, when I first started talking about this vision and and the idea of credential transparency and open data, people just looked at me like I was crazy. You had a good job in the Senate. Why on earth did you leave a good job in the Senate to do this, right? Now we've got the federal government talking about talent marketplaces, talking about policy changes. We have more and more companies and vendors that are offering the products and the services to make this real. We actually can have panel sessions at places like state higher ed executive officers meetings and others where people are showing up to learn how to do this. So we are seeing a shift happening. It's not going to be readily impactful for you know, a learner maybe that's leaving college now. But I am hopeful that those students that are entering middle school now, as they get to high school, we're going to be in a position where they're being issued digital badges and digital credentials into their own learning and employment record. And they're never going to know a difference. They're never going to know that Travelocity didn't exist, Kayak didn't exist before, I had to actually go see a travel agent. We're going to help them enter a different world as they enter high school and then post-secondary because we're making these moves now. Julian Alssid: It feels like it still is the wild west. But we're beginning you've got this massive data, thanks thanks to you and others. And we're able to mobilize and move on these multiple fronts. Is that a fair characterization? Scott Cheney: It is a fair characterization and and you know, there is a little bit of wild west still out there, but we're beginning to see organization out of chaos. We're beginning to see structure. We're beginning to see ways to have a map across that wild west. And to have known pathways and to not be afraid to veer off because you're not sure because you can see, I'm going for this credential. I also, people always ask, you know, there's 1.8 million is too many. Well, maybe. There are credentials that are out there that probably aren't that great. And that they should be ended. But that's the decision of whoever is providing them. If the if whoever is running that community college, whoever is running that industry certification feels like there's a reason they have it on their book still, okay. What I'm more impressed by is the fact that we have a really dynamic economy. And we have as someone I think Kaitlin you said, that there are skills now being needed that we never knew about before. That's fabulous. Right? It means we have an innovative dynamic economy that is constantly pushing the margins. And education is always going to lag behind, right? Because the economy should be more dynamic than we can keep up with. That's a good thing for the economy. We're just trying to shorten the time. And those information signals and and to get credentials created. And sometimes it's simply a different packaging of skills and that's a new credential, but the skills existed. Sometimes they're brand new skills. Either way, we're working to make sure that the information is being made available quickly, you can translate it, you can get that job. We just keep this really virtuous cycle going. And if we pass 2 million, I'm not going to sweat it. What I want to know is what are the skills in those credentials and how does it translate into whatever pathway an individual is taking. And if we have that information and we can help people navigate, you can navigate 10 credentials, you can navigate a million credentials because you have the information you need. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, it sounds like the momentum is there as you said, right? I mean, no time like the present to take this very innovative moment in our economy to to drive a lot of this other this really important work forward. So as we wind down today's conversation Scott, how can our listeners learn more uh, and continue to follow your work at Credential Engine? Scott Cheney: You can, you can get more information on our website, credentialengine.org. Importantly too, everything we do, everything we do is done openly and transparently. It's not just the mission we're about, but it's how we operate. So whenever we're doing updates to our data schema, whenever we're making policy decisions, we do them through open collaborative efforts. We call them task groups. So I would encourage anyone to get involved. You know, go to our website, get on our mailing list, see what task groups we're working on. It could be, we just finished a task group on better information about transfer. We've done ones on updating terminology around different types of certificates. We've done them as we try and expand globally to make sure that what we're doing here, we understand how terms are used internationally. So anyone from around the globe can join a task group, can be a part of this effort, and to make sure that that we're doing this collectively. We welcome all voices. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well Scott, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today. It's really it is such a welcome update and such an incredibly important work. So we we certainly look forward to tracking and to checking back in and seeing how things are going... Scott Cheney: Well I really appreciate the time to join you today. It's been a pleasure um, as you can tell I get a little enthusiastic about the work because I do think it is making a difference and it is going to transform how we how we help people navigate this entire space and their own well-being. Julian Alssid: Thank you so much for your time Scott. Great to see you. Scott Cheney: Thank you all.    

Tom Riendeau, Vice President of Workforce Learning and Skills at Magic EdTech, joins Work Forces to discuss the critical infrastructure powering the future of online education. While AI dominates the headlines, Riendeau argues that many organizations are still held back by "static" legacy content that fails to engage the modern learner. The conversation explores the operational reality of digital transformation, from improving student retention by streamlining the user experiences to using AI as a "smart assistant" for curriculum design. Riendeau emphasizes the importance of moving beyond transactional vendor relationships to find partners who can "see around corners," anticipating challenges like cybersecurity risks and accessibility compliance before they become crises. He offers practical advice for leaders on how to thread "durable skills" into technical training and build scalable learning ecosystems that truly support career advancement. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our workforce consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education, industry, and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Julian Alssid: Kaitlin, in so many of our recent podcast conversations, we have discussed AI and its impact on the future of work and learning. We are all grappling with where this new technology will take us and its long-term impacts on education and the workforce. However, we have spent less time exploring the very platforms and tools that support effective online learning at its core. Kaitlin LeMoine: Indeed. While online learning feels ubiquitous and like it has just "always been there," many organizations still hold on to static content—PDFs, textbooks, traditional curricula—that simply wasn't built for today's digital-first, immersive learning environments. And other institutions have adopted advanced technology solutions, but find themselves challenged by how to most effectively integrate tools into one seamless platform or experience. Julian Alssid: To really modernize, you need partners who can engineer that transformation. It requires deep expertise in both learning design and software engineering, and you need teams that can build everything from custom platforms to AR simulations to fully accessible digital content at scale. Kaitlin LeMoine: Which brings us to our guest today. We're joined by Tom Riendeau, Vice President of Workforce Learning and Skills at Magic EdTech, a provider of AI-powered digital learning solutions. Tom has spent over 35 years driving enterprise growth at the intersection of learning, technology, and workforce transformation. He has served as a trusted partner to higher education institutions, career training providers, and EdTech companies, enabling them to reimagine their content. And we're looking forward to speaking with him today! Tom, welcome to Work Forces. Tom Riendeau: Thank you so much. This is a terrific opportunity and I'm thrilled to be here. Kaitlin LeMoine: So Tom, to kick us off, please tell us a bit more about your background and what led you to your role at Magic EdTech. Tom Riendeau: Sure. You know, I have always been focused on education; that was the goal coming out of my undergraduate years. But I student taught and then said, I want to do something different. And I was very fortunate to get a job as an academic advisor at one of the first what we would call online universities in the early 1990s. And I had a really special moment there. I was an academic advisor to nursing students—and at that time that institution was set up to direct students to learning that already existed in their local communities and aggregate it into a college degree. I spent almost my entire day on the phone with students. And I was on the phone with a student who was pursuing her nursing degree, and she burst into tears on me. And she started to tell me about what was going on in her life and how if she didn't finish her nursing degree by the summer, all of the disaster that would mean not only for her, but for her children, and how she was newly a single parent and all of the stress. So it wasn't even an education conversation at that point; it was really about what's going on in your life. And that thread has continued through my career. Now, it has a happy ending, which is why I like telling the story. I got her calmed down, we had a lot of conversations over the spring, she worked incredibly hard, and then at a graduation ceremony that summer, I saw her kids holding up their "Yay Mom" signs. And that stuck with me. So it was not planned, but I had an opportunity to join the academic publishing world through a partnership that school had—it was one of the largest academic publishers. And that sort of led into new opportunities to start to look at the early days of digital learning. And so the common theme, because of where I had started my career, each of my employers let me dive into career-focused education. They let me work with their customers who were delivering that education—whether they were career colleges, whether they were the extended campuses of traditional universities as they were getting into online, whether they were certification companies—but with that common theme of: how do you change a person's life? How do you help them advance their career? And what does that mean not only for them but for their families? And as you start to think about it, I started to realize the impact that I was having on entire communities as I was helping more and more students—far outside of my limited capabilities to teach English to some 12th graders who didn't want to be there. And I say that cynically—I mean, with lots of love for what my parents accomplished as teachers and the lives that they changed. But really, I'm proud of all of that focus on working adults and their needs and seeing them not just as learners, but as human beings with families and communities. Julian Alssid: That's a compelling story, Tom, and glad you've stuck with us. Very mission driven. So, you've worked now with different types of organizations, plied your trade. So what are the types of challenges that your clients face, and how have those changed or evolved over the years in this space? Tom Riendeau: Sure. So there's some constants even over those entire decades. And those constant challenges are helping clients understand their local business needs—making sure that the solutions that my employers were developing for them are developing for them match what's actually needed. And it may be directly for that company, of what they're trying to accomplish. But getting that match right rather than just building things in a vacuum has been a constant throughout the decades. The other piece of that is the constant is acknowledging that human face of the learner. So focusing in on what are the support systems? So are the businesses that are going to employ the learners, are they supporting and creating an environment where the learner can advance? Is there a family structure that supporting it? And that doesn't have to be a traditional family—it could be neighbors, friends, extended family—what's out there and helping find those folks who are going to be part of that support ecosystem. What's started to change though is the student experience with technology. And that's a relatively new evolution. I talked to one very large national career college provider, and I remember going to a conference of theirs, and they had done research where they found that they were losing slightly more than half of their students within the first three minutes of their online programs. That the student experience at the login point was so complex that students were just throwing their hands up and saying, "I can't do this." And what a disaster that was for them from a business perspective, but also the human loss of, hey, here are all these learners who were excited enough to log in, to choose a program, to get ready, and that they were gone on Day One. I mean, that's an absolute crisis. And that's where a company like mine can really help in looking at that and thinking about, what's the experience of that student? If they've got 20 minutes on their lunch hour, are we making this as easy as possible for them to get into your programs? Is everything opened up for them and seamless so that they can see the value right from the beginning? Because with a few minutes, things get in the way and it becomes easy to create excuses not to continue. And then of course, just within the last few years, some very welcome things. A renewed focus on durable skills—and you know, there are lots of terms that we're using for that, whether we mean soft skills (which is kind of an unfortunate term), but durable skills, life skills, socio-emotional skills—that sort of social intelligence that workers need to advance in their careers to move on to more leadership roles, to even to move into middle skill jobs, you need that basic skill set. And that's been welcome because I don't think there's enough focus on that. It's also... what's changed is we're now thinking about how can we actually integrate that into all aspects of the learning as opposed to having it be the thing you do for one session at the beginning and then we forget it. Like, how do we actually make that part threaded through all of the learning? I think is essential. And then I know, I'm sure I'm going to get lots of questions about this, but what's just happened in the last year or two around AI and how that's moving. But that's, I'm sure, a whole separate conversation. Kaitlin LeMoine: It is a conversation unto itself! But I think that the changes you've raised are really fascinating, right? I mean, this focus on the student experience with tech—that it's not just the curriculum that they're engaged with, but also the whole... their whole experience with everything from enrolling, to logging into their first course, to, I would assume, interactions with their instructor or interactions with how they're assessed or graded. I mean those... it's kind of like that whole learner journey, so to speak. Tom Riendeau: I think it's important to treat AI, to think of AI, as your assistant in it. It's got to be a human-centered approach. But having a really smart assistant that can say things like, "Hey, did certification requirements require this particular learning objective? I don't see it here. Did you mean to leave that out? And should that be part of this healthcare course you're building? Because that's in every other course that we're seeing out in the world." That helps you build stronger content for your learner so that you're not missing things. And those are the kind of mistakes that if you're doing it manually, everybody's going to make along the way. So you've essentially got a really powerful assistant that can make the learning tighter. But to your point, Kaitlin, yeah, exactly right. It allows for more creativity on your side because you're not worried about having missed something. Julian Alssid: So, Tom, we're interested in hearing what practical steps you can offer our listeners to help them become forces in effectively adopting digital learning solutions in this complex and ever-changing environment. Tom Riendeau: So I'll tell you what I tell my clients. I think it's really essential to have a partner that you can rely on that can do the things either faster or better that aren't your core skill sets. So that's one piece of it. But what's really critical is: Do you have a partner that is... that understands the true strategic initiative you're trying to solve for? So, one way that you could approach things is to say, "Here's a list of all the great things we do," and that's probably duplicated across lots of different companies. Where it becomes really powerful, though, is when that partner can help you see around corners, that can help you understand what you may not be seeing yourself. Okay, so it's a line item, you know you have to do the accessibility work, but does your partner understand why you need to do that? You need to do that because there are hidden costs to doing it wrong. First of all, there's a regulatory cost to doing it wrong, but more importantly, there's a human cost that you may not even see from the learners who don't succeed, who should have been using your products, should have been singing your praises, and if you want the kind of growth that you're looking for, this becomes essential. If you haven't considered, for example, cybersecurity, and you don't have a partner that's really looking at that, what are the hidden costs of that? Of not modernizing your system. Do you have an insurance company, for example? I mean, this is the kind of things that I mean by seeing around corners. What happens when your insurance company comes back to you and says, "Well, we're going to triple your cybersecurity insurance cost because you're using an old system that's not up to the task, and we're not willing to take on that risk for you without a dramatically higher premium." Seeing that before it becomes a crisis. Having a partner who's going to who really understands what you're trying to do, that's where you can see growth, as opposed to a service provider who comes in and says, "Tell me what to do and I'll do it for you quickly and disappear." You know, helping find those organizations that can add value from that first conversation and come in and say, "Okay, you want to talk about this particular problem that you're facing? Let me tell you where the industry is going. Let me tell you what value I can add to this conversation and create that partnership that's really going to give you the growth that you need." Kaitlin LeMoine: The value that comes from looking around the corner—I feel like, you know, there's so much to be said for that. And I feel like that's what we're all trying to do, right? Is to say, "Where are we now and where are we headed?" and "Who can we predict, so to speak?" Because we are certainly in a fast-moving, fast-paced landscape that is the future of work and learning. Tom Riendeau: You want... the ideal sales conversation, if you're on the buying side of that, should be this kind of a conversation. Where is the back and forth? What is your service provider bringing to the table? How are they responding to your questions? And I love those kind of conversations. I want a sales meeting where there's lots of vigorous back and forth and pushback. I love it when a customer is like, "Wait a minute, I don't want to do it that way. Why should I do it that way?" And you know, a lot of times they have a really good reason for doing things, but that's where you get the kind of true value as opposed to, you know, otherwise you'd just order it on Amazon and be done with it. And I think for workforce education, it's got to be much more vigorous than that. It really needs to be a true partner. Julian Alssid: These... It's such complex work. And as you've pointed out, touches on so many aspects of an organization and learning. And I feel like this is becoming like a love fest for contractors and consultants here. But, you know, like, this is why we get hired to do what we do too! It's like, sometimes it helps to have an outside look and partner that's just gonna kind of raise questions and see things in a different way. It's really, really—having been on both sides of the fence, as we all have—it's really difficult when you're in an institution to try to innovate. Tom Riendeau: Well, it's also, it's also a matter of understanding what you do well and what you don't do well, and where you need capacity. There's a lot of good reasons to say, "Hey, for us to hire up a team to do this, to learn this skill set that's kind of outside of what we do... by the time we start seeing a return on investment, that could be months and years." Whereas, hey, for a really effective solution, we can just outsource that and have somebody who's already done all of that work and done all of that investment who can come in and work with us and understand us and help us grow that much more quickly. So, it should be seen not as a cost line that disappears, but really as an investment in growth. And I think, you know, the right partner is part of your investment and growth strategy, not... not a line item that, that you know, you have to deal with. Kaitlin LeMoine: So, Tom, thank you for taking the time to join us today. As we wind down this conversation, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Tom Riendeau: Absolutely. First of all, find me on LinkedIn. But please come to our website, and I'm sure we'll put that in the show notes, but www.magicedtech.com. I am trying to be at every workforce conference, so if you see me and recognize me, please walk up to me and say hello. I love having those conversations at events. But look for our website and for LinkedIn. We also have a fun Instagram account that my colleague Chiara is running that can give you some of the insight into our day-to-day and how we're... we're not just head down, but we're also having some fun on the side as well. Julian Alssid: Well, thanks so much for joining us today, Tom. Really appreciated the conversation. Tom Riendeau: An absolute pleasure and I thank you for your time as well. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces.info/podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like, and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about Workforce Consulting, please visit workforces.info/consulting for more details about our multi-service practice.  

Haley Glover, Senior Director of UpSkill America at the Aspen Institute, discusses how businesses can effectively upskill their workforce in an AI-driven economy. Drawing on her experience at Lumina Foundation, Amazon, and the Aspen Institute, Glover explains how upskilling has shifted from talent acquisition crisis management to strategic workforce planning focused on validated skills. She details findings from The Upskilling Playbook, emphasizing that successful AI adoption requires thoughtful, worker-focused training aligned with business strategy—not just technology purchases driven by peer pressure. The conversation also explores the All Learning Counts initiative, which advocates for recognizing skills regardless of where they were acquired, and new research on internship programs showing how companies find value through talent pipeline development, retention, and innovation from fresh thinking. Glover addresses distinct challenges facing small versus large employers and offers practical guidance for learners, educators, advocates, and employers to build resilient upskilling programs that withstand economic shocks. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our workforce consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education, industry, and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Julian Alssid: Kaitlin, so much of the conversation around the future of work focuses on the what—what skills are needed, what jobs are disappearing. But the harder question, and the one that really determines success, is the how. How do businesses actually help their existing employees develop the skills they need to succeed in a changing economy? Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely. While we know the need for and importance of upskilling initiatives, actually building an effective system that helps workers grow and advance is a really complex undertaking for employers. Julian Alssid: Right. It's one thing to agree that upskilling is necessary; it's another to have a playbook that works for both the employee and the bottom line. To create that playbook, we need guidance from leaders who understand both the policy landscape and the operational reality of business. Kaitlin LeMoine: Exactly. We need that along with insight into researched best practices across industries. And luckily, today we're joined by someone who brings that multi-sector perspective to the table. Today we're speaking with Haley Glover, Senior Director of UpSkill America, a national initiative of the Aspen Institute Economic Opportunities Program. UpSkill America drives research and efforts that promote employer-led education and training to help workers advance and help businesses compete. Julian Alssid: Prior to this role, Haley was Senior Program Manager at Amazon, where she led college programming for the company's Career Choice team. And before that, she served as a Strategy Director at Lumina Foundation—which is where we first met Haley—leading efforts to reduce racial disparities in credential attainment. Haley holds a bachelor's degree from Franklin College, a Master of Liberal Arts from St. John's College Graduate Institute, and an MPA from Syracuse University. Haley, welcome to Work Forces, we're thrilled to have you with us. Haley Glover: Thanks, guys. Good morning. Julian Alssid: Please tell us, in your own words, about your background and what led you to your role at Aspen Institute. Haley Glover: In the spirit of time, I will give you the short journey instead of the meandering one. But fun story: you mentioned I was at Lumina Foundation, and I was there for a very long time—about 11 and a half, 12 years. I not only led the work in my last four years at Lumina focusing on eliminating racial disparities and that kind of thing, I also led portfolios focused on what we called "employer mobilization," which in my glib moments I described as getting employers to do stuff. But it was really focused on understanding and motivating how employers can take their considerable resources, influence, and that unique positioning in employees' lives to mobilize toward the credential attainment mission. Back in 2015, when UpSkill started, I actually was one of the first funders of UpSkill at Aspen and helped try to kick that off back in the day. So my time with UpSkill started right at the beginning. Obviously, the initiative changed a lot over a decade, along with the economy, the workforce, and all of the things. But that is how I found myself here about three and a half years ago. This idea, this question about how employers can not only benefit from investment in skill development but create benefits for individuals, their companies, society, and our country—that has been a throughline of work that I've been doing for quite a long time. Between my past life as an educator, working in economic development, working in nonprofits, government, and philanthropy, as well as the private sector, that's been the river running through my work: trying to blend the streams and get more people to think very critically about how we leverage all of the power we need to get people the skills they need to thrive. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you for that overview and that story of how you got to where you are. I'm curious to know: how has the focus of your work through UpSkill America evolved over the last few years? You mentioned all the changes that are occurring—what do you see as the primary focus, and how do you see that shifting? Haley Glover: That is a fantastic question. I think there's a very simple answer, which is that the economy we're in in January 2026 is not the economy we were in when I came to UpSkill back in the summer of 2022. Three and a half years ago, employers were absolutely just falling over themselves to acquire and retain talent. The question of the time was: how do I find people with the right skills? How do I keep people with the right skills? How do I get the mass that I need in order to proceed? That is not the question now. Now, I think employers are really leaning into: what skills and competencies do I actually need to not only fill tasks and roles that I have right now, but to take me into the future? How do I not just retain talent, but retain the right talent in particular roles that are going to have strategic value for me going forward? How do I create robust pipelines that guarantee that I, as an employer, am not going to be wasting time, energy, and effort on the upfront acquisition? How do I build my workforce strategy muscles in order to understand with much more nuance and robustness this idea of what I'm going to need in the future? So, it's pivoted from a "fire on my front line right now" focus three or four years ago to a need to think much more critically about what's down the road and into the future. That's been huge. From the work that UpSkill is doing, we've leaned more heavily into this idea of getting much more specific and intentional. With the addition of AI—which is both a positive in that it can help people do things with less time, energy, and effort, but also a complicator—you've got this skills validation issue. I just read a piece the other day about a $600 billion resume fraud issue, which is really asking the question about skills validation. We are trying to make sure that (1) we get people to understand and be recognized for the things that they know and are able to do, regardless of where they acquired them. We've been calling this movement "All Learning Counts" for a very long time. It is this idea that it shouldn't matter whether you attended the most prestigious elite institution or you gained your skills through work. If you've got the same skills, you should be competing in the same way. What we do right now is we conflate a lot of different things with being "better" at something instead of really understanding what people can really bring to the table. So this idea of skills validation has become a much more important part of our work because it addresses both sides of the coin: employers need validated skills, and people need to understand their own skill set. A lot of people will go through education programs, training programs, and work experiences and not develop what we call this metacognition of what they know. Knowing what you know and knowing what you're able to do can be a very powerful, empowering scenario for an individual. It can also be the thing that sets you apart in an interview or a process because you can say, "I know what I know, and here's how I know it, and here's what I did to show it." We're also trying to really help the employer get specific about what skills they need and how to find them through this validated skills movement. So, we're much deeper into technology than I think we ever thought we would be, or that I ever wanted to be, frankly, because it is not my primary language. But it is the method that I think will ultimately produce the right kind of results for both people and the employers they work for. Julian Alssid: So Haley, I mentioned earlier in your intro that we need that playbook—how do you do it? You have produced a playbook: The Upskilling Playbook: AI Skill Development in the Workforce. Tell us about it. What are your findings? What have you learned, and what's in that playbook? Haley Glover: Yeah. Well, so the playbook is not just that AI chapter, which was our latest addition, but essentially pulling together all of the things we've been learning, doing, hearing, and writing about for many years now. The idea is that companies are not necessarily encouraged or inclined to share the things that they're doing. In fact, a lot of companies will fight against that sharing because it's "secret sauce"—the thing that we do that creates our own special business value. So when we have the opportunity to share broadly—like "here's what's worked at one company," or "here are results from another company," or "here's a process that appears to work across multiple companies"—that's our bread-and-butter activity. We can shine lights on things and make these secretive or specialized processes much more visible for other people. That's a really positive thing. That's what the playbook is about. The AI Skill Development in the Workforce chapter was a call that we decided to put out within the last couple of months here. It was less about "here's how companies should approach AI." I don't know how companies should approach AI. That is very much a "them" decision—what vendors they use, how they embed it, all of those things. That is a them decision. What we've been observing, though—and you can see this if you read stuff and pay attention—is that a lot of companies are doing a sort of "silver bullet" kind of approach to their AI work. They're saying, "Oh, if I just give this self-directed module and training on AI to all my people, it'll solve my problems." That's, of course, not true. "If I just buy a tool, it'll all work." Also not true. "If I feel like I must invest as an employer in this thing..." Peer pressure never solved really anything. So, what we are calling for and what we really are observing in this moment is that AI—when it is accompanied by thoughtful, humane, and worker-focused training and opportunities—that works. Product acquisition, when it is solving a business problem and serving a discrete business purpose, that works. Don't just hop on board. And leadership and workforce planning that is really thinking about AI in service of future goals, in service of those broader strategies, that works too. None of the findings surprised me because we are always going to take a sort of human-first lens on all of our work. But what I hope we are starting to contribute is this idea that any product, technology, or process absent workforce strategy and workforce planning won't work as well as it could. You have to do the work of understanding what your workforce needs, who your workforce is, and how to best support them to be able to do the things that you want and need. And then to know with great precision, as much as possible—two years out, four years out, whatever—what they're going to need to do and how they're going to be doing it. It's when those things interconnect, powered by AI, that something magical can happen. Kaitlin LeMoine: Haley, it strikes me that I think one of the complicated things about this moment is that AI tools are emerging constantly, right? And there's this historic concept that strategy can take a while, and yet we're moving at this very fast pace. In your research and the conversations you've been having, how are people balancing that reality? When do you say, "You know what, we're going to commit to these tools for a little while because we feel they meet these business goals and this broader strategy," and when do you say, "You know what, let's try this instead"? It seems like a very tricky balancing act right now. Haley Glover: I think that's going to be a different question for every company and every industry, because it's a question of tolerance. What is your tolerance for risk, for experimentation, for all of those "what-ifs"? And then, what is your strategy for evaluation? What do you care about? It does sort of speak to some of the things that we wrote about in the piece where, you know, if your evaluation strategy is, "Well, I had X number of sign-ons," or "X modules completed," or "this many instances purchased," what does that tell you? And if that is the only thing you're really looking at, you're probably not going to be in a position to really effectively understand if it worked or if it changed anything. What you might see are downstream effects like morale is bad, or managers are getting way overloaded with things that are coming from both sides, or you don't have enough information to really effectively evaluate your contract renewal. There's a thousand things that can happen on the other side of "piloting" if you don't really understand why you're doing it. So, I'm not suggesting that companies are just willy-nilly running in and just buying stuff. And yet, I think what we do observe is that workforce strategy is the muscle that companies need to exercise that can make these things work better. Because like I said, if you do know why you're doing it, what you want out of it, and how you're going to measure the outcome you really want to see within your workforce and within your organization, then you can really understand how it's all coming together. So, that might be a bit of a lame answer, but I think it is the truth. We see a lot of experimentation with technology without necessarily complementary thought around the other side of it. Julian Alssid: To complicate it further, Haley, you look at companies large and small in your work, don't you? So, can you speak a little bit—because that too brings a whole other world of issues—to how we compare Fortune 500s to more typically sized medium and smaller businesses? Can you speak to tech as it relates to the smaller ones? Haley Glover: The tech question is really very similar to other questions about evaluation and implementation of new processes and tools by industry size. Everything that we've found suggests that the things that we say "work" for large companies are sort of not relevant in many ways to small organizations for a lot of reasons. These will be obvious to you: if you've got an HR team that is HR and compliance and workforce and technology and also operating, that's too many hats for one human to wear and an environment in which decisions are made differently than when you've got a team working on each of those things. There's a capacity question, which is the biggest "duh" of them all: when somebody's wearing five hats, how in the world do they do another thing that can require a huge amount of compliance? This comes up a lot in apprenticeship: "Well, why if apprenticeship is such a great model, why doesn't it work for some people?" And that's because it requires a lot of work to really get the benefits of those programs. There's a cost thing: if your margins are low, you do not have extra resources to spend on doing the experimental and piloting work. You need ready-made solutions that are affordable or no-cost, and often you need support from organizations that are going to be wrapping around you and working with you—workforce boards, intermediaries, others. So there's multiple layers of why strategies and things that would work for very large companies just don't apply. And I do think, too, the risks for smaller organizations are higher because of margins, capacities, and otherwise. If you invest in a program or a technology and you're a small organization, that may be somebody you can't hire next year. That may be a contract you can't bid for. That may be something you can't purchase that you need. It's those kinds of really real challenges and real barriers that prevent us from saying unilaterally "employers should do this." It's always about context, about industry size, geography, and every other factor—which makes this work very challenging but, you know, we try to be attentive to it as much as we can. Kaitlin LeMoine: So Haley, you mentioned apprenticeships. I know you've been exploring work-based learning, internship programs, and the value of those in the workplace for employers and employees. Can you tell us some of what you've been learning as it pertains to that initiative? Haley Glover: Yeah, absolutely. And this is really exciting. We've got a piece coming out quite soon which I'm happy to share with you when it is released, but I'll give you a little sneak peek right now. Over the summer, we sort of were grappling with this issue of "business case," "value case." This is a truth, I think, for every question we have to ask of employers: we have to couch it in what value it provides to your organization. Altruism is not the motivating factor for the private sector. I think we all know that, but it can be harder, particularly for advocates, when you're thinking about why an employer might do something. So where we were taking a look is—we have a really great understanding. We did some ROI studies on tuition benefits back when I was at Lumina, and those are—I still use those all the time and they are used broadly in the field. We've got some interesting ROI information out of apprenticeship programs, though colleagues over at the Brookings Institution just released findings yesterday really showing that it's very, very hard to use ROI insights generally because the applications are, like I was talking about, context matters so much. So you have to really be careful about understanding those. And then we were looking around for—we have a general understanding of why employers do internships. And we really understand that the demand for internships, based on work by NACE and others, is huge. Eight-some million students seeking internships; about half got them. And as we think about the situation we're in with impacts on entry-level talent from AI and automation and all of those other things, people have to get work experience in order to get jobs. That's at least how we work now. And internships are a great way to do that. But how in the world do we think about growing the number of employers offering internships or growing the number of internships? So we sort of tackled this question of: where do employers find value? Why do they offer internships? What is driving them to keep these things on, especially as we enter sort of tumultuous economic times? We interviewed about 40 employers to sort of get under the hood of their internship programs to understand why they did them, what business objective they were trying to seek. And those findings, I think, were actually quite standard. We're not surprised really by anything that we found because employers are doing internships for the reasons that we would understand: their talent pipeline is not sufficient; they're not getting what they need from typical sources. They're trying to remediate against sort of a poorly prepared workforce; they're trying to say, "You need exposure in my industry. I'll take a chance on you, but if you don't have production experience, you don't have insight into where I am, we're really going to try to focus on that with internships." Things like low retention—creating a level of "stickiness" within new hires—is a really big priority. And then creating new opportunities for people who are managers or who are emerging managers to lead. Those are four big problems that they're looking to solve through internships. And we also looked at: what are the conditions within companies that make internships sustainable and successful? Those come down to conditions that can often be sort of hard to replicate, but you know that they're there when they are or aren't. Those are things like executive sponsorship: having an executive leader who is bought in and really on board with the program can be the difference between it thriving and being a part of the actual talent pipeline, and just dying on the vine when things get rough. Integrating across an organization: when the internship program is just this little pocket and they get dropped in, interns get dropped into departments and people are like, "What do I do with these people?", that can be a problem. So this cross-functional integration helps leaders see. Leveraging external partnerships: states are investing a lot in work-based learning and those, particularly for smaller businesses, can be ways of maximizing resources. And really thinking then primarily about effective programming: having actual learning outcomes, actual work that interns can do, actual supervision and mentorship, actual accountability. Those are all things that, from an organization perspective, can be really powerful. So why this idea of why do employers invest? Really articulated key business values: attraction. Employers, to almost a person, talked about how their internship programs are creating buzz on college campuses if they're recruiting; how interns from one summer go back to their campuses and say, "I had a great experience, you should apply." They love that because it is really creating a level of advertising and acquisition and outreach that they could never do on their own. They're really looking for readiness when it comes to having students or having interns start as full-time hires without the need for expanded onboarding, without a ton of time like "where is the break room?" They know already; they're ready to go. That can be a big cost saver as well. As I said, engagement and retention—keeping people longer—is always going to be a primary mission. They also benefit from increased workload capacity because if interns are doing real work, that can really benefit the bottom line. And there's also other effects that they want to have within their communities and their industries and their regions that should not be understated. So long story short, this piece will come out in the next several weeks and we're excited about it. But it puts a fine point on this idea that employers invest in talent in a lot of different ways, and building the business case—really understanding from all sides why, how the value gets created in the organization, how to maximize the impact of these investments—that is the thing that we're chasing. Because it's a positive thing we know for students; we want to make it just as positive for the employers that they're working with. Julian Alssid: Haley, did this research look at companies across multiple industries and, again, size of businesses and geographies? I know that this isn't publicly released yet, but are there any nuggets you can share of insight about where you're really seeing traction or where some of the challenges are? Haley Glover: Yeah. Well, so we did 40 employers—it is not representative, but we did seek for representation of all different sizes. So we talked to 20-to-50-people companies and 50,000-people companies. We talked to manufacturing, finance, insurance, services, tech—all of the industries. And then we tried to get a very solid geographic distribution. We had a little bit more representation from Midwestern companies because, as you know, getting in the door often requires a relationship, and that's where I'm based and where many of our partners are based. So yeah, I mean, a couple of findings: Small businesses, as I've sort of said before, they obviously can benefit I think a little bit more from the publicly resourced models that you have out there that are either reimbursing or replacing wages. They kind of look at it as: "This is a way we're meeting our talent goals and risk is defrayed by public investment." And so they, I think, are very pro those public programs, which is great because they're actually serving a public service; students are getting work experience and they are acquiring skills as a part of their programs of study and it is really working on both sides of the equation. Small businesses also struggle a little bit more with the administration and the overhead and the mentoring required. As a result, they often do smaller cohorts. We do understand from larger companies that cohort models can often be really successful because you're creating shared experiences, networks, groups to rely on and learn from and work together with. So there's a tradeoff there. And I think coming back to the workforce strategy question, it's always going to be: what kind of work do you have your interns do? What I think was really cool to hear from employers across the board—large, small, every state we talked to, every industry—is they are, to a person, I think really excited about the innovation and fresh thinking that interns bring. Whether it's something like what would have taken our staff member hours to do because they don't really know the tools, it took our intern 45 minutes to do because they'd been exposed to AI or whatever tool—they did it easily. Or they saw things in a different way than our team did and really helped us get over a hurdle that it would have taken us time to do. It's those kinds of things that I think are harder to understand the business value—like yes, of course, saving time equals saving money. But it is a really important factor in a lot of our value that employers get: this innovation and fresh thinking that comes from introducing a new generation of students with different experiences and not people who are entrenched. And positively, on the incumbent workforce side, a lot of employers talked about the "breath of fresh air" that this gives to their workers. Mentoring a new generation, sharing what you know, telling people how you do things and teaching them can sort of reinvigorate folks and get them re-engaged with their role. Kaitlin LeMoine: So you have offered many tips, strategies, potential practices. However, I would love to give you the space—we ask this question of all of our guests—what are, if you have any other practical steps you'd like to share around how our listeners can work with employers to become forces in this complex place that is work and learning, or help learners themselves? Take the question in whatever direction you'd like. Haley Glover: I really love the question because you said that word "complex." It's complex and it's complicated. And I don't think it's going to get less complex or complicated as we go forward. In this moment, leaning into learning as much as we can, into supporting each other, and being mindful that the decisions we make now, we are going to see the downstream effects of them in 20 years, is really, really important. So for learners: I was on a panel here in Indy before the holidays and they were asking, "How as a student should I best position myself?" It was a technology conference. And I said, "I can't tell you anything other than work." Obviously, try to find a job that is field-aligned, that will give you the sort of exposure to the industry and role that you want to have. Absent that opportunity: work. Because there is learning and knowledge and insight to be gained in any role. Our society doesn't, I think, give adequate credit to learning gained in some roles, and I think that's a tragedy. But employers are looking for experience and work ethic and the capacity to do the job, and the best way to understand what those things look like is to do them. So, work if you can. And for advocates and institutions, it is about supporting learners to know what they know. I think that's a big, big problem and a big solution too. We should not, in 2026, have somebody graduate with a credential and say, "Okay, now what?" or "How do I reframe these experiences that I've had in terms of skills that employers can recognize and appreciate?" Like, that stops. We've got to get past that problem of making sure that everything is as transparent as possible and that learners have evidence of the things that they know how to do and things that they know. So that's the higher education call: shift toward competency-based education as much as you can and be very, very articulate about helping students understand their own skill sets. And the advocates: know your business case. In trying to bring employers over to our side, to doing the programming, to expanding what they're doing, you have to couch it—especially now—in ways that the employer will benefit from. And if you can't share, if you can't tell employers what you know and how they can understand how this will impact them, you're going to have a much, much harder time because the economics are just different now. So learn that. And for employers: chances are, every single employer who would ultimately listen to this podcast is doing something. I've not encountered an employer who doesn't care deeply about the skills of their workforce. Now, some employers program more, some less, depending on all kinds of different things. But the point is: keep doing it. Make what you're doing more visible to employees and to others. Share your stories and think about how what you're doing is creating value for your organization. The thing that frightens me—back in 2020, when the pandemic hit, we'd been doing so much work to focus on the employer business case and really understanding how employers were advancing education for their incumbent workforce. And when the pandemic hit, I was like, "I think this is all going to go away." I was so worried that in the shock of that economic shock, we were going to lose programs that were investing in students and their education and pipeline and all of that. And what we saw, I think due to unique circumstances that the pandemic produced, was actually a doubling down and huge expansion of supported education. I'm not positive that the next economic shock won't be different, but I keep thinking that if we really understand how this is contributing to the bottom line, we really understand how this is benefiting employees, employers, our communities, our nation, we create just that bulkhead against the shock. So those are I think the four levels of how I would think about what to do next: make this work bulletproof, and then we can really keep it going. Julian Alssid: Yeah, and it's, you know, I feel like you're singing our tune and I couldn't agree more. Such words of wisdom, Haley. So, how can our listeners continue to learn more and follow your work? Haley Glover: Sure. So, we're upskillamerica.org if you're interested in doing old-school website spelunking. We're pretty prolific when it comes to papers, so there is that. And then follow us on LinkedIn—both for UpSkill, but also I'm always happy to engage on LinkedIn with people individually, I do a lot of that too. And then, you know, don't be afraid to drop us a line. I'm always interested in learning more about what's working and our model is to partner and elevate as much as we can. And so, please don't hesitate to get in touch. Julian Alssid: Great. Well, thank you so, so much for taking the time. Haley Glover: Awesome. It was fun, and I'm really glad, Julian, we're still friends after all of these years. It's been a while fast, yeah. Julian Alssid: There you go. Kaitlin LeMoine: It was great to see you today, Haley. Thank you. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support, and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces.info/podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like, and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about Workforce Consulting, please visit workforces.info/consulting for more details about our multi-service practice.  

David Adams, CEO of The Urban Assembly, discusses why building the bridge between K-12 education and employment must start much earlier than post-secondary education, emphasizing that foundational human skills like self-management and social awareness require years of intentional practice. Drawing on his experience leading a network of 22 career-themed public schools serving over 9,000 students in New York City, Adams explains Urban Assembly's strategic evolution from building schools to developing scalable, relationship-based technology solutions that address systemic pain points in education. The conversation explores how Urban Assembly's tools automate information delivery while preserving human judgment and relationships at the heart of learning, achieving a 92.4% graduation rate across their network. Adams emphasizes the importance of posing real-world community problems to K-12 students to simultaneously foster citizenship and career readiness, offering practical strategies for educational leaders to incorporate social-emotional learning and data-informed career navigation to drive economic mobility. David Adams, CEO of The Urban Assembly, discusses why building the bridge between K-12 education and employment must start much earlier than post-secondary education, emphasizing that foundational human skills like self-management and social awareness require years of intentional practice. Drawing on his experience leading a network of 22 career-themed public schools serving over 9,000 students in New York City, Adams explains Urban Assembly's strategic evolution from building schools to developing scalable, relationship-based technology solutions that address systemic pain points in education. The conversation explores how Urban Assembly's tools automate information delivery while preserving human judgment and relationships at the heart of learning, achieving a 92.4% graduation rate across their network. Adams emphasizes the importance of posing real-world community problems to K-12 students to simultaneously foster citizenship and career readiness, offering practical strategies for educational leaders to incorporate social-emotional learning and data-informed career navigation to drive economic mobility. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education, industry, and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Julian Alssid: A central theme of this podcast is the need to align our education systems with industry demand. And Kaitlin, you know, we've looked at this quite a bit through the lens of higher ed or workforce training, and lately, the conversation seems to keep shifting upstream. Kaitlin LeMoine: It really does. We are hearing more and more that if we wait until post-secondary education to build these bridges, we're probably starting too late. There's a growing consensus that we need to be doing this work of connecting education to potential careers much earlier in a learner's journey. Julian Alssid: Exactly. And when the discussion turns to K-12, it takes on a very specific tenor. It's not just about early technical training; it's about foundational human skills—social-emotional learning, resilience, problem-solving—skills that employers tell us are critical for long-term success and take many years of practice to develop. Kaitlin LeMoine: That's right, Julian. And to really understand how to do that effectively, we need to look to organizations that have been doing this work on the ground for some time, which brings us to today's guest. We are speaking with David Adams, a leader who sits at the intersection of social-emotional learning and career readiness, creating public schools that actually bridge that gap. Julian Alssid: David is the Chief Executive Officer of the Urban Assembly, a nonprofit organization that creates and supports a network of 22 career-themed public schools in New York City. These schools serve over 9,000 students. The Urban Assembly is dedicated to advancing the social and economic mobility of students by improving public education. Kaitlin LeMoine: A nationally recognized leader in social-emotional learning, David previously served as the Senior Director of Social-Emotional Learning at the Urban Assembly, where he created the Resilient Scholars Program. David serves on the board of directors for EL, EAP, and formerly for the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. He also serves on numerous advisory boards, including Teach For America's Social Emotional Learning Advisory Board. Recognized for his leadership and impact, David has received many honors and awards, including being named one of Crain's 40 Under 40 and receiving a citation from the Mayor of New York City. He is also the author of numerous scientific articles and book chapters on social-emotional learning. In addition to his contributions to education and research, David serves as a civil affairs officer in the Army Reserve and holds an M.Ed. in educational psychology from Fordham University. David, welcome to the Work Forces podcast. We are so thrilled you could join us today. David Adams: I'm so happy to be here today with you, Kaitlin and Julian, to talk about workforce, social-emotional learning, and AI. Julian Alssid: And we are so looking forward to this conversation, David. To kick us off, please tell us a bit about your background in your own words and what led you to your role at Urban Assembly. David Adams: Well, Julian, I've been married for about 15 years to my wife, Tamika. I've got two kids, Elijah and Isaiah, they're 12 and 13. And I'm actually from New Jersey but have spent most of my time here in New York City. My focus has been on social-emotional learning because I've been really interested in this notion of what underlies academic and life success. And there are a set of skills that we call competencies—things like self-management or perspective-taking, social awareness—like the ability to understand your emotions—that actually end up predicting a lot of what we want young people to be able to thrive with when they graduate our schools here in New York, but also nationwide. So I came in and started working in special education in New York City as their Director of Social Emotional Learning in District 75. Prior to that, I was at Yale University doing some research in England thinking about implementation around emotional intelligence. Then I came to the Urban Assembly in 2017 as their Director of Social Emotional Learning, and I've been here ever since, thinking about how we can work with our schools to scale solutions that support student access and thriving across the country. Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. So, I guess as we dig deeper into the Urban Assembly, can you tell us the origin story of the organization and how the organization's work has evolved over the years? It sounds like you've been there for many years, so I'm sure you have a very detailed perspective. David Adams: Well, the Urban Assembly was started in 1997 through our founder, Richard Kahan. And the Urban Assembly was founded in order to think about how intermediaries and public-private partnerships can support academic outcomes in New York City. So what had happened was that there was a prison being built in the Bronx, and some local community partners came together and said, "We don't want more prisons in our neighborhoods, we want more schools." And so Richard worked with a young Meisha Porter and hired a young David Banks at the time to build a school to support young people's development. And then, when the comprehensive high schools were being broken down in New York City and small schools were being built in their place, Urban Assembly built 22 of those schools, eight of them being career and technical education schools. Then by like 2017-18, where there was less of a focus on building schools, we started developing—moving from, as I say, "schools to tools." We started developing tools within our schools that could scale to solve challenges in instructional quality, post-secondary readiness and access, and of course, social-emotional learning and development. And those tools—the Resilient Scholars Program, Project Café, the Classroom Automated Feedback Environment, and Counselor GPT—are tools that are designed to support all students coming from the area of social-emotional learning, post-secondary readiness, and instructional quality. Julian Alssid: So you have a pretty rich body of work there, David. Tell us a bit about the successes that the Urban Assembly has experienced as an organization, and particularly as you think about the K-12 alignment to industry needs, and also the success rates in the past taken by Urban Assembly graduates. David Adams: Well, our graduation rate across our schools this year is about 92.4%, which we're very proud of. We had one of our schools, the Urban Assembly Institute for Math and Science for Young Women, posting a 100% of their graduates last year—so 100% of their students graduated, we're very excited about that. And our students go on to success in the post-secondary context. Our job is not just to graduate our kids, but to think about how to ensure that they have that economic and social mobility that you mentioned. So, we're actually building a new tool out and it's called Counselor GPT. And this tool helps our students understand what the labor market is looking like in their local area, helps our students identify what credentials are related to economic and social mobility vis-à-vis getting that credential and being successful, and what the ROI or return on investment is on that credential. We see a lot of students who are pursuing post-secondary paths that don't necessarily align to economic mobility. And so what we're doing with Counselor GPT is we're actually moving students from guessing to guidance. We're helping them think about what credential is necessary to get to the economic or social pathway they want to achieve vis-à-vis two-year degrees, four-year degrees, and certificates. One good example of this is a student—we were just looking at some of the output from this tool—and a student was like, "I didn't realize how long it would take me to repay my college degree if I chose this major." And so we're seeing students now really being a little bit more intentional about the decisions that they're making. And it's not to say that if you go to a difficult ROI degree, maybe something like art history, that you shouldn't take it, but you should do it with an informed understanding of what it costs to pursue that degree and what the ROI is when you leave post-secondary institutions like college and beyond. So we're very excited about that tool. We're working with our schools now to pilot that. And the tool has actually been accepted as one of the 10 AI tools that are being piloted in New York City through the Chancellor's AI pilot initiative. Kaitlin LeMoine: Wow. That's awesome. Congratulations. David Adams: Thank you, Kaitlin. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah. So, would love to talk a little bit more about that tool and others. You mentioned this shift, right, from—I liked that concept—of "schools to tools" that can be used across schools and beyond these 22 schools. And I'm wondering, would love to hear a little bit more about some of the other tools that you've found great success with over time? And then also, how do you walk that line of what tools can be implemented asynchronously or with tech-based tools, and when do you need that human one-on-one connection? And how do you think about that? David Adams: So all of our tools are relationship-based. So the Counselor GPT tool, while it is a chat-based interface, it also is accompanied by a curriculum that a student could use in their classroom with their counselor or their advisory teacher so that they have the opportunity to not just talk to the bot, but talk to each other about what they're learning about the post-secondary landscape. So we believe that learning happens through interactions, and we want to make sure that those interactions are with a wide variety of formats—whether that's online with your chatbot friend, or whether that's with your counselor thinking about how this conversation has informed what you want to do in a post-secondary context, or whether it's your real-life friend like Julian or Kaitlin. And we just want to say, "Hey, did you know that X-ray technicians are an 18-month degree, but come out making 75 to 80,000 pretty quickly?" And that's a conversation that we're looking to have. Now, to your other question, we're really excited about our other tool called the Classroom Automated Feedback Environment, or CAFE. And this tool is designed to reduce the cost for teacher feedback. So essentially we have a camera and a microphone, and a teacher videotapes themselves. And within one day, automatically get insights into things like: How many questions did they ask? How often did they ask questions? We have little video-based 10-second clips which show them their redirections, it shows them their summaries, it shows them their previews. And what we're doing is building judgment and high-quality insights so that teachers can do what real athletes do every day, which is watch themselves play the game, reflect on what went well, and then tune the next play—or the next lesson plan—so that they're more successful over time. And so we believe that by reducing the cost, we can increase the access, and that's how we think about scaling from our schools to all schools. Now, the last thing you asked, Kaitlin, is: how do we make decisions? So, we have a strategic priority and it's called "Find Out What Works." And essentially what we do is we look at what we call generalizable problems in our schools. We say, what is a pain point? What's a time problem set? What's a resource problem set? What's an incentive problem set? Or what's a knowledge problem set in our schools that we're seeing that's constraining our school's ability to deliver the highest quality education to our students? Once we identify that problem set, we think about—is this a problem that our schools are facing, or is it a problem that all schools are facing? And we do that through research, conversation, and other ways of pursuing that. And once we identify that it's a problem for more than just our schools, then we start to think about, well, how might we solve this problem? So for Project CAFE, we recognized that getting teachers feedback is a problem set. Teachers need more feedback, more frequently. What's stopping teachers from getting that feedback? Well, it's time, but it's really, at the systems level, a resource—because time is expressed through money, right? You just don't have enough people giving that feedback. Once we realized this wasn't an Urban Assembly problem, we developed a solution against that, which is automating the observation techniques. And then we got that out to market and now it's being used in over nine states by 500 classrooms at the end of this year. Julian Alssid: David, one of the challenges that we hear about in schools is teachers are just so busy trying to get through the day with their core work. And interested to hear from you a bit about the sort of staff and professional development required to implement the tools. Like, what have you known? And also I'd say that a lot of our listeners are organizations that are, you know, EdTech types that are inventing tools that they're bringing out to try to save the world. You've been doing this for years. How do you make it work and work within the context of a teacher who is so burdened and under-resourced in so many ways? David Adams: So I think what makes Urban Assembly special is that we sit adjacent to our schools. We work with our principals, work with our teachers and our educators to really move from "what" problem sets to "how" problem sets. I think we have really deep expertise in how schools work, how schedules work, how high schools deliver on the promise of a high-quality public education. And so when we develop our tools, they're developed by, with, and through our educators. And very sensitive to what it means to be a first-year teacher in New York City or somewhere else, or even a 15-year teacher. So the tools are—I'd like to think—are intuitive in a space that we are making a decision around how much analysis should be done by people and how much analysis should be done by technology. And my focus is really on leaving judgment to people, but automating information. In the case of Counselor GPT: what labor market trends are available in your area vis-à-vis credentials? Now your decision is how to use that information to make post-secondary decisions. That's on the teacher, that's on the student, that's on the family, right? For CAFE, we're actually not judging teaching; we are observing teaching and allowing the teacher to judge what they want to from those observations. So we don't say "this is a good question" or "bad question." We say "this is an open-ended question" or "it's not an open-ended question." We don't say "this is an effective redirection" or not. We say "this is a redirection," and you can decide how effective that was by watching your videotape and seeing how the students respond. So I think the professional development here is about teaching folks how to derive insights and judgments from the information that we're providing, which is our goal. Our goal is not to get teachers to act like robots. Our goal is not to get students to always choose the most lucrative career. Our goal is to inform, to create judgment, so that we can improve outcomes for our schools across the country. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, and it strikes me too—it's a two-part model where some of what you're trying to do for learners, you're also looking to do for everyone. Like, we're all humans, right? We're all trying to figure out what technology can do and what humans can uniquely do. And so to have that experience for both learners and staff and figure out what that teaching and learning looks like across systems, I think is really fascinating and critical, right? Because it feels like teachers are then kind of in that position of being of continuously learning, and then applying that learning to how they're teaching their learners. David Adams: Absolutely. I use the example of student-teacher talk time, right? The goal of CAFE is not to increase teacher talk. The goal of that metric is to have teachers reflect on how they're giving space to students to have discourse in their classroom to drive their learning. So the goal is not to beat the metric. The goal is to use the metric to inform your decision-making in your classroom. Same thing with Counselor GPT, right? The goal is not to all choose the career that is the highest ROI. The goal really is to reduce the mismatch between what is needed in the industry sector and what students are pursuing vis-à-vis their degree. And how employers indicate what is needed is through salary. And so if students don't have an insight into what salaries are doing what in the labor market, then they may not be informed in their decision around what they pursue in their post-secondary landscape. Kaitlin LeMoine: So we've heard so much about—I mean, it's been awesome to hear about—these various tools that you're scaling and how you're going about doing it. I'm curious to hear as you've gone about trying different models, approaches, developing different tools, what are some of the challenges that you've faced? And how have you gone about navigating those challenges recognizing that it sounds like a big part of what you're looking to do is, like, scale these initiatives and make sure they reach more and more teachers and learners? Just curious to hear some of your lessons learned. David Adams: Yeah, I mean, I think there are sometimes fears that we're trying to replace, for example, college counselors or guidance counselors. The ratio of students to guidance counselors is usually about 1 to 400, which translates to about 19 minutes of college counseling for students across their entire high school career, right? So it's not really a conversation here about moving that from 0 to 400; that doesn't really solve the problem. The question is how do we get information to students about their post-secondary decisions given the ratio of 1 to 400? And so I think shifting our mindset a little bit around how we work through these constraints—we're not replacing people, we're enhancing what folks can do when they have those 19 minutes so that it's not like, "Kaitlin, all right, let's see, your GPA is X, Y, and Z"—you're not having the first conversation. So built into Counselor GPT, for example, is a guidance portal where post-secondary counselors, guidance counselors, college counselors can get a sense of trends around what is it that students are talking about? What are their concerns about post-secondary landscapes? What are the places that they're over-matched or under-matched in terms of applying? There are flags that go to counselors that say, "Hey, Julian has applied to nine schools that he's probably under-matched in—we can actually push his ambition a little higher." So let's think about knowledge as a constraint, and let's think about blowing that constraint up in the age of AI and moving to the delivery of information in a way that's sustainable for the teaching profession. Same thing I think in Project CAFE—teachers are concerned sometimes that being on camera will hold them liable to things that happen in the classroom. But in our design, we're really looking at what teachers are doing well, capturing what teachers are doing well, feeding back to teachers what they're doing well in order to increase the efficacy and increase the likelihood that they do these effective things, right? So, here's my redirection, let's see how that worked, let's get more redirections on CAFE, look at those redirections and see how we make that work more effectively. So I think trust is important. Design philosophies that emphasize transparency are important. I'll give you one last example in Project CAFE: there's not a single metric that doesn't have a corresponding display of that metric in terms of the evidence. So if I say my student-teacher talk time is X, you can actually click right into that metric and look at what the conversations were that made that metric up. If I say I had a really good—I had 22 previews—you can actually click on each of those individual previews and see a teacher say "this is what we're going to be doing in the lesson." So that builds this trust with our constituents that everything that we display has an evidence behind it that you can see upfront in terms of how we developed that metric and how we developed those dashboards. Julian Alssid: As you expand or bring the tools to new districts and new schools, both in New York and around the country, how does that process work? And do you typically have to find champions to make that happen? Just a bit about how that process works, I'd love to hear. David Adams: I hope we can spread the word! Our job is to improve public education and our job is to help students achieve that economic and social mobility that we talked about in our mission. So the more schools we get to, the better we are meeting our mission. And we also have a real deep focus on access. My job is to get the most access to the most people so that they can use these resources to solve problems. And so it's things like podcasts, things like presentations, things like media, and it's things just like having conversations with folks who want to solve problems and reach out to the Urban Assembly to help us do that. Kaitlin LeMoine: I guess as we start to wind down our conversation, David, we're wondering: what are some of the best practices that K-12 or high school leaders can incorporate into their work to further align education to emerging industry needs and become forces in this work? Feel free to also take this from the perspective of AI. David Adams: Yeah, it's a great question, Kaitlin. I think what we need to be able to do is create applicability to the things that we're learning into the real world. And this is from the social-emotional perspective—how are our learning formats like collaboration, project-based learning, how are we using formats that reflect the way that we do things in a real world, which is working in teams? And then also applying learning to real-world problems. Inspire our young people not to just prepare for society, but to take part in society in the K-12 space. We don't have to solve all the problems of the world once we graduate; our young people can be part of those solutions as well. So I would offer that we should pose the same problems that we work on in the real world to those young people. I mean, most of us didn't need four years of college and two years of Masters to get after some of the problem sets that our country is facing and our communities are facing. I think we can do that day one. And I think we honor our young people when we give them tasks that are relevant to our communities. And that's going to prepare them to be the citizens that we want in our country today. So that's how I would create forces out of the folks immediately. Julian Alssid: And so David, how can those forces—or wannabe forces—learn more about your work and continue to follow you, of course in addition to listening to this conversation? David Adams: Well, you can definitely look up the Urban Assembly at www.urbanassembly.org. We have some sign-up forms if you're interested in participating in any of our solutions around social and emotional learning, instructional quality, or post-secondary readiness. You can follow me on Twitter at @DAdams_SEL, look me up on LinkedIn, and you can just search "David Adams Urban Assembly" and I should be the first one to pop up. Julian Alssid: Well, thank you so much, and lots of options there. It's been so great talking with you today, David. Really appreciate your time. David Adams: It's been a pleasure to be on your show. Thank you. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you so much for joining us. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces.info/podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like, and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about Work Forces Consulting, please visit workforces.info/consulting for more details about our multi-service practice.

Mitchell Stevens, Professor of Education and Sociology at Stanford University and Co-Director of the Stanford Center on Longevity, discusses the urgent transition from a "schooled society" focused on credentials to a true "learning society" that recognizes and supports learning across the entire lifespan. Stevens explains how the traditional three-stage model of education, work, and retirement is becoming obsolete as Americans move toward 100-year lives amid rapid technological change brought by the Fourth Industrial Revolution. He argues that legacy school structures that are built for durability and stability cannot by themselves prepare people for ongoing adaptation, emphasizing instead that learning happens everywhere: at home, work, and play. The conversation explores how declining fertility rates mean societies must rely on older workers, requiring a fundamental reimagining of human capital investment beyond children and young adults. Stevens calls for new conversations about who is responsible for lifelong employability and offers practical guidance for parents, young people and voters alike. Transcript Kaitlin LeMoine: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort, please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Welcome back. You know, Julian, we spend a lot of time on this show talking about the future of work, but there is a massive variable in that equation that we don't discuss enough, the reality that we are all likely to live much longer lives and need to learn continuously along the way. Julian Alssid: It's so true. Kaitlin, we're moving toward what researchers call the 100 year life. The old three stage model where you learn in your 20s, work for 40 years, and then retire is rapidly becoming obsolete. We can't rely on a one and done dose of education, and need to fundamentally rethink how we access and engage in learning experiences across our lives.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Exactly. We need to move from what our guest today calls a school society focused on credentials and early life education to a true learning society where learning is ongoing and achieved through many contexts over one's life. Our guest is leading the initiative to define what that society can look like, mapping out a future where learning work and leisure intersect throughout the entire lifespan. Julian Alssid: Our guest today is Mitchell Stevens, Professor of Education and Sociology at Stanford University. He convenes the Pathways Network and studies history, finance and politics of post secondary education in the United States and worldwide. Mitchell is the author of award winning studies on home education and selective admissions, and his most recent books are Remaking College: the Changing Ecology of Higher Education and Seeing the World: How US Universities Make Knowledge in the Global Era. Kaitlin LeMoine: Mitchell is also co director of the Stanford Center on Longevity, where he convenes the Learning Society initiative. This effort brings together leaders from various sectors to imagine a learning ecosystem that supports all of us across longer and multifaceted life. He's written scholarly articles for variety of academic journals and editorial for the Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Education, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. We are so thrilled to have you join us today. Mitchell, welcome to the workforces podcast. Mitchell Stevens: Thank you for having me.  Julian Alssid: Yes Mitchell, welcome, and we've talked a little bit about your background, but we'd like to have you tell us about your background and what led you to co directing the Center on Longevity.  Mitchell Stevens: I would say one of the formative experiences for me, intellectually, as is often the case for academics, was their doctoral work back in the 90s, I studied the home education movement and drove my multi-used car all over the Chicagoland suburbs to talk with men and women who were making, at the time, a very radical decision to remove their children from school and teach them at home. One of the big lessons that home schoolers taught me and now many others, is that the rhythms of conventional schooling that so many of us take for granted are highly demanding and often fairly rigid structures. They are not very flexible for the needs of particular people or even the rhythms of complicated lives. That's really what planted the seeds for what we're currently calling the limitations of a schooled society, one in which not only education and learning, but many social rewards, good jobs, social status, looks of approval from parents and grandparents, is really tied to educational credentials, and especially in the face of very dramatic and rapid changes in the character of work and technological change coming to question whether legacy school structures themselves are the best way to prepare people for ever more complicated futures. Kaitlin LeMoine: So there are many places to jump into based on that explanation. We appreciate, we appreciate you kind of giving a sense of what has led you to this work. I guess one place I'd love to take the conversation to start is we recognize, within the last year, your work on the Learning Society within the Center on Longevity has really taken off. We'd love to hear more about the goals of that initiative and what you've sought to accomplish this year, and where you're where you see it headed. Mitchell Stevens: How we get from home schooling to longevity, I guess, is the second half of that question that I elided the first time around. I came into the Stanford Center on Longevity, just as a professor at Stanford around 2017. Someone encouraged me to go because their assemblies were so good. I was in my mid 50s. I'd been at Stanford for just a couple of years, and I was, frankly, kind of blown away by the intellectual breadth of the conversations of that organization. First of all, we call it the Center on Longevity, not the Center on Aging, right? Aging is a frowny face, right? As in anti-aging and preventing aging and denying aging. Longevity is a strong net positive. It's a gift that the 20th century gave all of us. In fact, Laura Carstensen, the director of the Stanford Center on Longevity, likes to point out that lifespan grew in the 20th century more than it ever had in the entire previous centuries of human history combined. Very large change, say, additional 30 years of life over that decade, and it's happened very quickly. Societies and cultures have not had time to adapt to this gift. What have most societies done? In fact, all societies on earth at present, we parked those additional years in old age. Old age is the most expensive and arguably least fun part of the life course. It's when our bodies are most frail and when our minds are most fragile as well. So the goal of the Center on Longevity, and in fact, a global longevity movement, is to make functional adulthood as long as possible, keep old age short, but extend functional adulthood so that our minds and bodies can enjoy life and contribute to the well being of others for long, as long as we possibly can. And let's say also this is not the Silicon Valley live forever longevity. That's not really the game that the Center on Longevity is playing. We are trying to think about longevity as a civic gift that all of us should be able to enjoy, and in fact, that we need to be able to take advantage of, because also of declining fertility. Around the world, except for Sub Saharan Africa, are experiencing net declines in fertility. So that means that the men and women we're going to need to rely on for economic prosperity and civic health, are going to be older. They're going to be more mature, and so we need to sort of rethink pretty much all of our institutions in order to enable those older men and women to make the best contributions they can to their own lives, to their families, and to their societies. Another tie to the homeschooling movement, however, is that the longevity movement has developed a bunch of terms heuristics to make sense of transitions that we used to think were the sole purview of childhood. One of my colleagues refers to, for example, there's adolescence, but Barbara Waxman calls it middlessence. Middlessence is the transitions that adults make between different life stages. Michael Clinton argues that we don't retire, we should instead rewire, right, so the idea that longer lives require but also allow us to change our lives in fairly fundamental and substantial ways, to have multiple chapters in life that look and feel different from each other. So again, these are the sorts of conceptual tools that once you start to use them, it's really hard to it's hard to move backwards, Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, and it's interesting to think about that framing of how to rewire and think differently about these different stages, but without the formal structure of schooling, or without the formal like now I'm going from K 12 to higher ed, right? Like these, these formal moments in one's trajectory. I feel like it's a whole other experience to say, how do we rewire without those formal structures, and what does it look like to structure it for oneself? Mitchell Stevens: That's an excellent point. Kaitlin, I mean, one way to think about the American high school, you know, grades nine through 12, is it's an elaborate machine for enabling the transition from childhood to adulthood. And for relatively more privileged families, the four year college degree is another machine for transitioning from childhood to adulthood. One of the things that's happened with the fact of lengthening lifespans is we've made adolescence one ever longer, right? So demographers talk about a domain called emerging adulthood. There's a lot of cultural ambivalence about what it means to adult as a verb, right? And. I would argue, appropriately, an increasing questioning of, have we scaffolded the transition from childhood to adulthood in the right way? We have high school, then college, and now, sort of an increasing conversation about what the early 20s are like, for example. So while you're correct that, historically, we have created organizational machinery for managing those earlier transitions. It's not necessarily the case that I would want to, you know, mimic that infrastructure for late life, but it's also the case that, as you said, that we don't really have clear rituals for navigating these different transitions. Imagine how, I mean, think of how much psychotherapy is bought and sold. How many support groups and self help books are promulgated because people are looking for mechanisms to make sense of the kinds of transitions that we're talking about Julian Alssid: Well, and so we're really, you know, we talk a lot about, and have for years and built a lot of our work around the notion of continuous learning and lifelong learning and and I'm really interested in speaking of terms, in examining the term you use learning society. And you know, how do you define it? What are the factors that are at play when we think about how we all learn?  Mitchell Stevens: Yeah, so the Learning Society project grew out of a year long conversation at the intersection of the fact of lengthening lifespans and the revolutionary changes that AI and related technologies are bringing. There's an extraordinarily large conversation in the United States and globally now about how to prepare people for economic viability and flourishing in the wake of rapid technological change and questions about the extent to which legacy school models are the best way to do that. Very rarely does that conversation get leavened with questions about longevity in the life course. So we talk about the need for adaptability and resilience at work, but we don't talk about the fact that the adaptability and resilience at work that we're going to need from people is going to come from people in their 40s and 60s and 70s. We talk, for example, about how current versions of large language models are good at instrumental tasks but not good at wisdom. We talk almost never about the kinds of men and women in which wisdom is found, right? Wisdom typically resides in older workers, right, whereas flexibility is thought to reside in younger workers. So, you know, putting AI in the future of work discussions alongside the facts of longevity and declining fertility, we think, you know, the men and women, the scores of men and women who have been working with me on this issue, we think that that makes both conversations richer and more substantive. So that dialog is what produced the idea that Julian just mentioned, which was sort of a an overly simplistic, but nevertheless useful heuristic in which we contrast how Americans invested in human beings in the 20th century with how they might invest in human beings in the 21st. In the 20th century, Americans responded to two waves of massive technological change by building schools now during The second industrial revolution, which took place between the Civil War and World War I, Americans created universal mass schooling for children to enable the basic skills of literacy and numeracy that an increasingly industrialized society required in the so called Third Industrial Revolution, the transformations brought about by the semiconductor and the Internet, we massively expanded higher education. We created what the Clinton and Obama administrations called the knowledge economy, and we strongly advocated for post secondary education, aka college for as many people as possible. Those were very substantial investments, and they yielded very strong positive returns, economically, civically. Now we're in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Schools will not save us this time. It's not the case that we can grow schools or fix schools in ways that will enable the kinds of flexibility and ongoing development that the 21st Century requires, why not? Schools are built for durability and stability. They're built to not change. That's why social scientists talk about chronic reform in education. You notice that we're constantly reforming school? Right? We're constantly fixing something that is presumed to be broken, that's in some ways because of the bureaucratic character of schools themselves. They're set up to be stable, right? And, again, those structures were very good for human capital development in the 20th century. By themselves, they are not going to be adequate vehicles for investing in human capital. Will they be essential civic assets? Yes, right, in some ways, we must organize the first decades of the life course around something like schools, because we oblige adults, we oblige mothers and fathers to go to work all day, right? So we're not going to live without school, right? But nor can we presume that schools, in their current form and by themselves are going to enable the kind of, you know, iterative development that the future needs. So in the past, for example, we, you know, extended what counted as good enough education first from from grade eight to grade 12 to grade 16. Well, do we add another six years to get people ready for the fourth industrial revolution? I don't think so, right? So one of the big goals of the learning society is to just remind people of things that they already know, which is that schools themselves are limiting organizational structures, and we're going to have to think in new ways. Hence, a move from schooling, which happens in bureaucratically organized structures called schools, leading to things called degrees, to something called learning, which happens everywhere, at home, at work, at school, at play, at worship, and that we need to think about ways in which we can fund, scaffold, incentivize, and reward learning wherever and whenever in the life course it transpires. Kaitlin LeMoine: And as you say that Mitchell, it also makes me think about building these skills fairly early on for learners to recognize when that learning is happening and be able to talk about it, call it out, reflect upon it, have it connect or build across either like you're saying formal learning environments or informal environment that we wouldn't call learning or school, but where that same, you know, a certain type of skill or body of knowledge is being explored and developed. It's and you know, it don't require like, it requires that explicit instruction to say, like, how do we build that awareness? How do we build for learners, the ability to say, okay, learning isn't only happening in this one structure called school, but everywhere. Mitchell Stevens: Well, one of the, I find, intellectually satisfying and refreshing parts of this dialog is that Americans have been in conversation about what the essential purposes and content of education should be for a very long time. So say, for example, that we presume that some degree of numeracy and literacy are essential components for economic well being and civic participation. Well, how much literacy and how much numeracy. Right question one.  Two are literacy and numeracy enough? Answer, no, but then, but then? What else, right? So these are questions that the architects of early education thought a great deal about these are questions that have been wrestled with by Jean Jacques, Rousseau, John Dewey, Maria Montessori, John Holt, Ivan Illich, right. Is schooling for skills? Yes, is schooling for inculcating a certain kind of character or disposition toward knowledge? Yes. ]How much of one versus the other? We're never quite sure, right? And so what I like about that is that it reminds us that these questions about, you know, what it means to be an adequately educated human being is sort of constantly in flux, right? So that we should embrace this question for our time, you know, rather than see it as a sort of new obligation that has come to us by virtue of artificial intelligence, right? We've been here before, and we're going to be an ongoing dialog about it, even as the Fourth Industrial Revolution unfolds. What is also very satisfying I find about this conversation in the United States is that education and learning is a widely shared cultural value in American life. I always challenge my students. Can you think of any problem in contemporary American life that people do not think schooling or education can help mitigate or improve? And that is true across a broad political spectrum. Americans may disagree on who's responsible for providing education. Whether, for example, the relative role of quote, government, unquote, versus, say, families or communities. But you'll be hard pressed to find a political or cultural constituency in the United States that does not think that more education and learning is generally a good thing. So we have a lot of faith in education and learning, and we actually have a lot of faith in schools, as long as those who are participating in them have some, you know, sense of involvement and participation. So one of the things we're trying to do with Learning Society is sort of take that positive, positive feeling that Americans have toward education and learning and directing it towards sort of new forms of learning provision that make more sense for our time. Julian Alssid: So now this topic is front and center like never before, and recognizing that, I think there is a greater and greater recognition that learning is truly this lifelong pursuit, you know, however you think the you know, whatever you think, is the right mix and who should be doing it and where it should be happening. How can we think about or rethink our learning trajectory across life stages, you know, and as especially as technology becomes you know, and technology, unlike technology we have seen before with AI becomes a more significant role in learning and work and the rest of our lives. Mitchell Stevens: Julian, I'm really glad you said that. You said these issues are front and center. I would say they are front and center in new ways, right? So in the middle of the 20th century, the 1950s and 1960s they were front and center in terms of who goes to school with whom. The question was the organizational contexts within which children of different backgrounds were coming together or not specifically along racial lines. That animated a great many national discussions. In the 80s and 90s. It was preparing for the knowledge economy, and that was in the era, although actually all the way through the early 2000s the second Obama administration and College for All was the mantra of the moment. I don't see those conversations as being sort of any less central now. But the content is different, right? The content is not is get everyone to college. It's how do we adequately prepare people for ongoing technological tumult. Right now, the strong positive on that, in my view, is we have put brackets around school as the human capital strategy to pursue. Right what's so nice about the idea of learning as opposed to schooling, is that we can recognize that learning happens all over the place, right? I can learn a lot without having much schooling. I can have a lot of schooling and not have learned very much, right? And I think there's a growing, I think healthy recognition that Americans have tied a great deal of social rewards to school credentials, and have discounted learning that happens in other ways and in other contexts, right? So I see this moment of yes anxiety, great anxiety about about how you know, technology will disrupt our lives, but also at least the opportunity for a great deal of optimism moving forward. Are there ways in which we could recognize and honor learning happening in a wide variety of contexts in ways that we haven't acknowledged before? Kaitlin LeMoine: So we've spent a lot of this conversation talking about the role of school, and I'm wondering, as we think about adults and adults who are perhaps, you know, many years removed from education, as you're you know, as you're approaching this work, how are you thinking about adults and how we reframe our own learning trajectories or our own approaches? Right? Mitchell Stevens: Some of the great challenges of this moment, I would say. One is that I've said Americans have put a great deal of faith and value in education and learning. We also have a great deal of faith in investing in children, right? Doing things on behalf of children is something that is sort of a relatively smooth path to public and private patronage, right? You know, honoring and serving adults that were not well served by legacy schools is a very different kind of project, right? And Americans, you know, we don't have a similar sort of philanthropic commitment to adults with modest education and modest earnings, right? So the population that we're going to need to rely on and invest in more to enable economic prosperity and human flourishing forward, it's just going to be different than children and young people in whom we were mobilized to invest in the 20th century. The other thing that does keep me up at night is I do know that we get massive investments in human capital, massive investments in people in the United States in response to global conflict. War often mobilizes massive investment in people. So we certainly saw that in World War II, when the nation relied on colleges and universities to recruit, train, mobilize soldier citizens, we saw that also with the Higher Education Act of 1965 massified college education in the name of global geopolitical prominence for the United States in the wake of a threat from the Soviet Union. We are now, what, four years, you know, several years into large language models. I see a significant challenge to American primacy, economically and militarily in the global stage. You know, we're but we're still crawling under the tables right? AI is still going to come get us right. We have not developed a national narrative of positive, optimistic investment in people to match the anxiety and fear that AI has created. That troubles me a great deal, and I speak from the heart of Silicon Valley, where even some of the most vaunted experts on AI and the future of work often sound pessimistic that some, somehow, somehow, what we're supposed to do is enable human flourishing, despite artificial intelligence, despite the massive disruptions to work and the rest of life that that these technologies are going to bring, rather than framing these as empowering technologies that require comparable investment in human capacity in order for the nation and the world to flourish without national and, frankly, fairly urgent narrative of organized around investing in people that we're going to miss a very large opportunity to get the nation ready for The prosperity that that we could achieve if we thought of these technologies as opportunities rather than fates? Julian Alssid: Yeah, so, so true. Mitchell, and I think it is really that uncertainty and that anxiety that is filtering down to the masses in ways we've never seen. I mean, people are really concerned about their jobs and the high cost of getting an education that may or may not lead you to a prosperous future. And I agree with you that thinking about this all in a more positive light, and how we can be enabling humanity realizing its potential, is really where we have to move with this, because there is a lot of anxiety, and that is what I've never seen before. Workforce development has never been discussed by people at a typical cocktail party. Mitchell Stevens: Yeah, that's, that's for sure. And I actually see that as a strong net positive too, because for the last quarter of the 20th century, and again, well into our own, you know, we placed most of our eggs in the college basket, right? I mean, there were rooms you could not enter in Washington and Sacramento, if you had the temerity to say that: "well, gosh, not, maybe not everyone is well served by a possession of a four year college degree". That ideology has been bracketed, but it has not been replaced by any comparable narrative of investing in people that was nearly as compelling as the college for all project. What was great about the college for all project was that you kind of knew what the goals were. Right. The nation was going to be a better place the more people, the greater the proportion of people entered and completed four year degrees. We put that aside, I think, appropriately, because there's nothing to presume that a four year college degree is the sine qua non of being ready for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. But we haven't replaced it by some other target of accomplishment, of human investment that would similarly mobilize and organize investment so and I see that as a real, real challenge, challenge politically, because there's no shared optimistic vision about what the nation will look like 10 years from now, if we all work in the same direction. I think that absence of a positive narrative is part of how we have arrived at the the current presidential administration, and its second chapter, it's a problem scientifically, because we don't know, say we want to enhance human learning across the life course. Well, what is, what is the goal of that? Right? How do we sort of organize research to move us in that direction? And so one of the goals of the learning society project is to try to set a table, to establish what some of those audacious and optimistic goals would be. Lifetime Learning and prosperity is great, but how do you know if you're getting there? Right? You know there's a great deal of ambiguity about that. At present, and you know, sort of to try to disambiguate that, to try and specify some goals for the United States we want, in 2035, terms of human capital is very, very much a part of the learning society's ambition. Kaitlin LeMoine: So, building off of that last statement, Mitchell, we often ask about how our audience can become forces in these efforts. And so I'm wondering, as we wind down our discussion, what are a couple of practical steps that our audience can take in 2026 and beyond, to become forces in supporting the development of a pathway for continuous lifelong learning. Mitchell Stevens: I think there are several things that I would encourage people at different stages in life to pursue. One is, if you are the parent or grandparent of a young person who is in high school or headed toward high school, think very carefully about what kind of conversation you might want to have with that loved one about what their transition to adulthood should and could look like, right? If there's a presumption in your family that people should go to college, where does that presumption come from? What is implicit in it? What do you think that college, you know, something called college, is supposed to provide? You know, don't take that presumption for granted if you're from a household in which you know, you know, college has not been regarded as a sort of viable or approachable activity. Lean into that right. Ask questions about yourself, about what would it mean to get ready for a very rapidly changing world of work. Don't presume that there are experts who can help you do this right, because we don't have a script for this moment yet. The other is to think about again, if you're a parent or a grandparent, how many careers should you talk about your children having? Is it one? Is it three? Is it five? Right? How might you encourage those young people to think about the relationship between earning money and raising families and caring for loved ones? Because one of the cruelties of the schooled society is that we often oblige people to choose between working for pay, investing in themselves by going to school, or taking care of loved ones, right? You know. How would you encourage a young man or woman who might be anticipating having children to sort of, sort of think about the relationship between those things. If you are a young person you know, you might think about, you know, think about a world in which you get to have multiple adult lives. You get to have multiple stages. Not only are you going to grow up, but you can, you can have several chapters of adulthood, right? It's kind of fun to imagine, you know, what that might look like if you're a voter. I would encourage you to think about, you know, who is responsible for the lifelong employability of the people in your state, because the only thing that the people in your state are owed right now is a high school diploma. Is that enough? Do the people in your state deserve more investment than a high school diploma? If the answer to that question is yes, well, what are they owed? A four year college degree, a two year college degree, an education savings account, tax subsidies for tuition. I don't know what the answer is, right, but that question about who's responsible for Americans sort of meeting the challenge of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is really an open question, and I think we should be asking the people who we want to represent us that question. I don't know what the answer is. It's not my place to have the answer, but I think raising the question about responsibility for human flourishing in the fourth industrial revolution is something that we should have conversations about constantly. Julian Alssid: Well, you're certainly raising the right questions. Mitchell, and we thank you so much for taking the time today. We will definitely follow you on learningsociety.io, and look to see more and more of these questions surfaced and unpacked and answered for all. Mitchell Stevens: My pleasure, honor to be here. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you so much for taking the time. Mitchell, we hope you enjoyed today's conversation, and appreciate you tuning in to workforces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info forward slash podcast. You can also find workforces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends, and if you're interested in learning more about workforces consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.

Isaac Agbeshie-Noye, Program Director for Widening Pathways to Work at the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) Foundation, addresses the critical gap between employers' intent to adopt skills-first hiring practices and actual implementation. Drawing from his background in higher education and workforce development, Agbeshie-Noye discusses the newly launched Center for a Skills First Future, designed specifically to support small and medium-sized businesses that employ half of all Americans but often lack the resources of large corporations to navigate hiring transformation. He explores the striking disconnect where 90% of employers acknowledge the benefits of skills-first hiring, yet only 15% have actively implemented it, and explains how the Center's many resources—including a Skills Action Planner, resource library, skills-first credential, and vendor database—helps employers determine an achievable place to start rather than boiling the ocean. The conversation addresses frustrations from both job seekers navigating an AI-enhanced application landscape, and employers struggling to distinguish genuine skills from enhanced resumes, while emphasizing that skills-first approaches complement rather than replace traditional degrees by treating skills as the primary currency for understanding what all credentials represent. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in.  Kaitlin: Hello all, hope you are having a wonderful time as we wind down 2025. We are back with another Work Forces "Rewind" episode before we launch our new season. Today, we're revisiting our conversation with Isaac Agbeshie-Noye, Program Director for Widening Pathways to Work at the Society for Human Resource Management (or SHRM) Foundation. In this discussion, we unpacked the critical gap between the intent to hire for skills and actually implementing the practice of doing so. Among many takeaways, Isaac shared insights on how employers can move toward a true skills-first approach to hiring. We hope you enjoy this conversation. As always, Julian and I want to express our deep appreciation for you, our listeners. We are so grateful for your continued feedback and engagement with the Work Forces podcast. Your support drives the conversations we have and the work we do. Enjoy this Rewind episode, and stay tuned—we'll be back with brand new episodes to kick off the next season very soon. In the meantime, we wish you a very happy new year! Kaitlin LeMoine: So our conversations on the podcast and in our consulting practice recently, increasingly revolve around the movement to a skills first approach to educating, hiring and developing talent. Julian Alssid: Absolutely Kaitlin and and today we're turning our attention to the employer side of of that equation. And this is a critical conversation for all employers, but it's particularly critical for small and medium sized companies, where half of all Americans work. These smaller companies often lack the dedicated resources of large corporations to measure and track skills development, and it makes it challenging for them to adapt to new hiring models. Kaitlin LeMoine: That's right. And while skills are all the buzz, there can be a real gap between intent and action. According to the Society for Human Resource Management, or SHRM Foundation, 90% of employers acknowledge the benefits of skills-first hiring, but only 15% have actively implemented it. That's a striking gap, and many HR leaders and executives recognize its strategic value, but struggle to implement significant changes. Julian Alssid: Our guest today is uniquely positioned to address this challenge with a particular focus on helping small and medium sized employers unlock a wider range of qualified candidates by valuing a candidate's abilities and understanding how skills relate to traditional credentials. Kaitlin LeMoine: Isaac Agbeshie-Noye is Program Director for Widening Pathways to Work at the SHRM Foundation. Over the last decade, he's served in a variety of leadership roles across nonprofit organizations and higher education institutions, and focused on aligning strategy, culture, and operations to create lasting transformation. He's also been an instructor for undergraduate and doctoral student seminars, exploring his passion for easing student transitions through their educational experiences. Isaac earned his bachelor's degree in sociology from the University of Virginia, as well as masters and doctoral degrees in higher education administration from George Washington University. Isaac, welcome to this podcast. We're so excited to have you on Work Forces with us today. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Yes, thank you so much for having me. I'm excited to be here. Julian Alssid: Yes, and thank you for joining us, Isaac. We've talked a little bit about your background. Well, tell us a bit more and what led you to your role at the SHRM Foundation.  Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: I got here in part because I'm always very fascinated and very passionate about education and how people go about learning things that then activates them to do things. And so working in higher education, and encountering all of these college students that came in at 18, 19, 20, 21 years old with some understanding of the things that they thought that they were going to do for the rest of their lives, that was just really fascinating to me. And then seeing the evolution over time where their mind changed around that thing, that was also fascinating. I ended up getting into workforce development and talent cultivation, because I realized that it wasn't just enough to understand what they were learning when they were on the college campus, I was really intrigued by then what did they do? Like, where did they go? Where did they end up? How did they navigate their careers after they left that environment? And so that kind of helped me think more broadly, beyond getting people to degree attainment to getting them actually to career mobility and to ultimately, a productive citizenry, which is what, which is what the mission of higher education is actually designed to be. And so I got connected to the SHRM Foundation in part because I just have been really fascinated with, how do we get employers into the game even further to understand their role and to help them as they are trying to tap into this workforce that is filled with skills, but yet we're not matching people in ways that are quick, even though we can see some of the ways in which there might be alignment. And so this position is is actually structured to help try and address that, that gap. Kaitlin LeMoine: As we jump into this conversation, we'd love to learn a little bit more about the SHRM Foundation and your role in widening pathways to work.  Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: The SHRM Foundation is the 501(c)(3) nonprofit arm of the Society for Human Resource Management. And the Society for Human Resource Management is the largest network of HR professionals in the world. And so we have 340,000 members that are then deployed and activated into all types of businesses around the world. And so we believe that we can leverage HR and leverage those professionals to advance social good, which is how the foundation came to be. And so in the foundation, we focus on three bodies of work: strengthening the HR field, because we don't often think about who's going to come behind the current HR folks, and who is actually going to take on the new challenges related to HR, and how are we positioning those folks to be successful in that, and so we have a body of work that's focused there. We have a body of work that's focused on thriving together, and how are we creating cultures of care within employers and employer environments. And so how are we focusing on things like the social determinants of health, about or caregiving or workplace mental health, the types of things that make people feel seen and safe at work in order to continue to be there. And then the third part is my area, which is the widening pathways to work area which is focused on skills first, and the things that we do to help employers adopt skills first approaches. How do we test things, try things out so that we are reducing the risk as best we can for people to adopt initiatives that are going to help talent be seen better. And then the other part of that is untapped pools of talent. So who are we not seeing and how can we create opportunities to see them better and also to get them fully activated in this world of work. And so the SHRM Foundation does all of that, and our goal is to try and figure out where are, what's the messaging, what are the levers, where, who are the partners that we need to bring together to actually make this ecosystem work for job seekers and employers at the same time. Julian Alssid: Tell us a bit more about your area, Widening Pathways to Work. And in particular, we're really interested in hearing about the new Center for a Skills First Future. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: What's so exciting about that portfolio is that we're really trying to figure out what are the things that are getting in the way, and how can we start to solution around those things? And so we know that there are 7.3 million open jobs, and we are highly dissatisfied with that, because it's not because there's a shortage of talent. There's just a shortage of alignment. There isn't those connections and those systems that we're leveraging to make talent visible so that employers can make hiring decisions that make the most sense for them are, to some degree working, and in a lot of ways not working, and that is resulting in a lot of job seekers being incredibly frustrated, and employers also being dissatisfied with what they're getting. And in an age of AI, where we do have some functions that are being shifted based on technology, and we have job seekers leveraging AI to try and make themselves look more visible and competitive, we're in this environment where we have to be having this conversation about how we get these different sides to see each other. So that is what's exciting about the Widening Pathways work, because we are going to have to be considerate of all the things that are happening socially if we're going to make these pathways wider for everybody to walk through them. The Center for a Skills First Future we just launched that in June. We're really excited about that, because this is our try to help meet employers where they are, and that type of work is critical. You've mentioned before about our specific focus on small and mid sized businesses. This is intentional, because for large and enterprise businesses where you are well resourced to try a lot of things. And, you know, figuratively, throw a lot of spaghetti at the wall. You can try a lot of things to see what works. And then you can invest, or make investments based on what you think is working. And you have teams to support that you have, quite frankly, you have teams. To try a lot of different things. For our small and mid sized businesses, they don't, do not have that luxury as much. It's usually a team of one or a team of two that are driving all of the initiatives related to human capital in the organization. And so you can't, you know, it's hard to be thinking about managing benefits and also recruitment, and also employee grievances, and also onboarding and off boarding. And so what we were trying to do is to figure out, how can we put a series of tools at someone's fingertips and let them choose their own adventure? And so that's what the Center really tries to do. So we have four major components of it, where we are trying to take resources and make them most accessible. We have a Skills Action Planner, so any organization can go in and just knowing what's going on at the organization, you can take this assessment, which will give you a readout of your current state and where you are in terms of adoption of skills first practices, and also it maps out for you your desired state based on what you said that you would like to be. And we just then curate a list of resources to help you get from point A to point B. And so we try to remind people, this is this is the time to be ambitious, but we don't have to boil the ocean. So you get overwhelmed when you think about all of the skills first things that you could do. We try to normalize for folks, but it's okay to just do one thing. Just, let's just try that one thing and see how that goes. So whether it is removing degree credentials from a job description, or maybe it's leaning into behavior based hiring, whatever you choose that makes the most sense for where your organization is, we'll give you some tools to at least try and get that momentum going. We have a Skills First credential. It's a one of a kind credential. So for folks that are trying to learn more about what it means to navigate this space and how to navigate some of the barriers you may be running into in your organization, there's a space for you to learn and deepen your skill set so you can help bring others in your organization along, which is really exciting. We have a resource library where we are amassing all of the things scholarly and practically, that have been sourced around this movement, and having it all in one place so that you can search for it however you need to and get access to it. And then for folks that are further along than know this is what I want to do. I just need a vendor, or I need a partner to help me. We have a vendor database where people can go in and just access those professional services that they need to get something off the ground to move closer to implementation. And so we created this hub with the support of 14 coalition partners to really figure out, What do employers need, and how can we make those tools most accessible to them? We're acknowledging we are operating in this space because we have the connections to employers. We're not the only people operating in this space, and everybody has a different lane that they're working in some folks focus on talent. Some folks are focusing on employers. Some are focused on community based organizations. Some are focused on policy. But we all have to be in a conversation together about this, because the ripple effect impact all of us, and so it's great to also have brought together this coalition to be having these conversations together, and so we're excited about the center, and we're excited about how it can hopefully help accelerate adoption for as many people as possible, regardless of how your organization is structured or where you are on your skills first journey. Kaitlin LeMoine: So Isaac, given that you know, this was developed with a coalition of employers, really at the table to help inform. I'm curious to hear a little bit more. What are some of the most pressing challenges you're hearing from employers? Like, what's the perspective of, I know you said, you know, maybe just start with one thing, right? Like, maybe it's hard to take on this whole skills-first bucket of work. But I'm just curious to know, you know, what are some of the perspectives you're hearing from employers and from job seekers in this new, relatively new skills first environment that we're operating in? Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: I'll start with the job seekers. I think that the process is frustrating. This is a tough job market to be in right now, and I say that not only is someone working to widen some of those pathways, but also as somebody that had to navigate that job market. And so I'm three months into this role, and so I also was on the job seeking side, trying to figure out how I get my skills recognized and validated, and this is a hard environment to do that, particularly. When folks are also leveraging AI to make enhancements to their candidate materials, like your resume, your cover letter. And so we're finding that a lot of things because of that look the same. So it becomes really hard for employers to distinguish who has done what. And so that is a very frustrating experience for job seekers to be in, where you want to be actively participating in work, but because of the scale and the size of the job market right now, it's just really hard to stand out on the employer side. We hear a lot about there's a lot of intent, as you mentioned earlier. You know 90% of employers want to be leaning into these skills first approaches. Only 15% have actually done things that's because operationalizing a big idea is hard, and change is harder, especially when you have developed a tradition around certain types of practices that you feel like makes it easier. Like before, a degree was a signifier for you that somebody had some skill or proficiency that you wanted, and you could then filter people out by that. Now we're seeing degrees are not the only place that are telling those stories. Experiences tell us that, skills tell us that, competencies tell us that. And so how do we create an environment where employers can see all of that and then know what to do with it, because it's just so much, and in that environment, not all things operate the same or are created equal? Not all credentials are the same, not all degrees are created equal. So for a hiring manager that's just trying to understand, can this person do what I need? There are so many things to consider to try and get to that answer, and we're then finding people are going through that process of getting through that to that answer, and finding out that that you know, there's more upskilling that's needed, or there are additional supports that are needed in order for that employee to contribute and actively participate. So there's just so many things going on here for employers and for job seekers at the same time, and because there are very few mechanisms for those populations, those audiences, to be talking to each other, that's just harboring more frustration right with the process, because people are not really communicating, and also people are existing with all of these challenges that seem insurmountable to try to fix. So what we're trying to do, at least on the employer side, is make it more digestible, to make it step by step, for us to start thinking about, oh, well, have you considered this? Let's just try this first, and let's see what we're learning from this. Let's understand what success looks like when it comes to this. And one other thing that I'd like to add is, I do want to emphasize, we have chartered this Center for a Skills First Future, and sometimes there's some confusion around what Skills First actually means. And so we are trying to figure out that many different ways that people can be visible to employers and employers can recognize and validate certain skills, but we're not saying that this is a complete replacement for the bachelor's degree, and so we're not working in competition with degrees. We're trying to figure out and get clearer about the ways that degrees also convey a certain set of skills. And so we're trying to treat skills as the primary currency here for us to even understand what degrees tell us when they come across or when applications come in. And so that is one misconception that I'm hoping to clarify, is that we are not trying to campaign against degrees. We're not saying degrees are not valuable. They obviously have a lot of value, but the underlying thing around a degree, a degree is supposed to signify skills and abilities and competencies, and so we're trying to figure out, how do we get closer to that, so that whether you have a degree or not, you can still be seen and can actively participate in this job market and contribute to the workforce. Kaitlin LeMoine: Right. And so that everyone is communicating their skills regardless of what degree or credential has been attained. It's about this is the important thing for everyone. Yep. A lot of sense, yep. Julian Alssid: Right. And it brings us back to that interplay between work and learning and education. And again, it's complicated. We can't separate these all out artificially. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Yeah, they're all in relationship with each other. I will mention anything with talent is so it's challenging because success is always moving, like the metrics with success is always changing. And it's the long game. Like, you don't know when you sometimes you know when you hire someone, and you're like, I don't think so. Or maybe sometimes you might know, but for the most part, knowing that somebody can actually perform well, it takes time and but we are so inclined to want to know whether something works right away or not, and you can't do that with people all the time. It takes a while for you to know that, okay, this decision I made, using this approach worked, and I would, and I'm interested in doing it again. And so, so we're trying to remind people that this is a long game, and we can't usually see that the ship is turning while we're in it, but you can surely look back and say, Wow, look at where we were, and look at how our processes have changed, and who we've been able to get here and then retain over time. So we are on our way there in ways that will support employers and job seekers at the same time. It makes Julian Alssid: It makes a lot of sense Isaac, and it's interesting Kaitlin as Isaac, talking this through, it so resonates for me in terms of the work we do, which is workforce and talent development, is really complicated. And it was complicated before AI, it was complicated before skills first. And it's not getting any less complicated. And so a lot of what we end up focusing on is trying to get to start somewhere and to iterate and to get some success, and to try to build on the success. And if something doesn't work to adjust, and as you say, because each situation is so different, each, you know, down to the employee or the company or the industry. And I guess the question I have for you is, and I understand that the Center's early days. You know, it sounds like you've been giving this a lot of thought, obviously, and interested to hear about any early wins, you know, sort of specific early wins that you can speak to where companies have begun implementing skills based approaches to you pick, recruitment, hiring, training. Kaitlin LeMoine: Or even specific tools, right? Like, which tools are working really well, right? Because I feel like it is hard to know sometimes, like, what are the resources that are really going to stick and really help the most HR professionals? Yeah, right. I mean, given the number of members you have. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: I love this question, because there are just so many. There are just so many stories to tell. And this is, in part, what we are so excited about with the Skills Action Planner, is that it does give people also because they're reporting on their current state, they're telling us about wins that they've already achieved, that they may not even be recognizing as wins. And so if you're even at a place where you got to that Planner and you can say that I've had a skills first conversation with my team, that is a win. And so we're trying to at least celebrate those things and recognize those. But what we are featuring on our site is we have a host of employer examples. And so you can go into our library and click on employer examples, and we we have sourced over 100 different examples across different industries regarding practices that people have taken on, whether it's been focusing on apprenticeship, and using that as a gateway for people to enter the organization, learn about the role, and then to develop in the role, or we have organizations that have taken advantage of different ways of seeing and recognizing skills, so that they could then provide a curated list to employees regarding the types of skills they could develop in order to be competitive for a promotion or an advancement in their job. And so we've had examples around that. We've had organizations that have shared with us about ways that they're rethinking professional development or upskilling just based on what they feel like their future needs are. And so we've had organizations that have built succession plans built on the skills that employees who are leaving are leaving with so that they know then what to recruit for and how then they need to up staff themselves in order to perform those jobs in the future. So we have lots of examples there, so that people are leaning into those for inspiration. And it's not just you looking at a checklist and figuring out I need to do A, and then B, and then C. It's you trying to figure out, okay, this organization took this approach. They're working in construction, they're working in manufacturing, they're working in retail, and they have understood that this is a problem for them, and this is how they went about trying to fix it. That may not be the approach for me, but I could take some of the things that they've applied there to think through what could actually work for me and where I am. And so the employer examples, I'm going to always be yelling off of, I'm always going to be screaming about those, because more than scholarly articles and other things, they give you some idea about how somebody took theory and actually turned it into practice, but practice that worked for them. So I do encourage folks, we have quite a few on quite a few there, because we've had to design a product that hopefully was industry agnostic, even though people are always wanting to know people are always feeling like they are a snowflake, and in the world of work, like there's nobody else like them. And that is to some degree true, but a lot of the issues that we deal with are similar across a lot of organizations, and so just seeing some examples of how people have gone about it, and a lot of different examples hopefully helps to unlock people's minds and hearts to think differently about what it could be. And so I encourage folks to check out that library, just to see some of the examples that we have in there that we're really excited about. Kaitlin LeMoine: So building off of your last response here, I feel like what you just said about, you know, the industry agnostic tools and steps and strategies especially, but you could, you could provide industry specific examples as well. I'm curious, what practical steps do you recommend that our audience can take to become forces in developing skills, first practices? What are a couple of takeaways you can leave our audience with today? Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Yeah, so I will, I will respond to that in two ways. So thinking about audience as employer, understand where you are. So we have a we have that Skills Action Planner to just position people to just understand. Can you articulate what is going on at your organization right now? What are your needs currently, and what do you anticipate your needs being? And that is it's it makes the world of difference for you to know that it provides the greatest amount of clarity, because even HR leaders or other folks who are positioned hiring managers, because you can always level set with your leadership around here's where I think we are here's where I think that we're going. Is that right? And that is useful? And so I think that all employer partners, you're representing an organization, and you're listening, that is step one as an individual, because I also think that we all have individual agency here, step one is for me. And I told folks this at a conversation I had a couple of days ago. Do you understand what your skills are? Because how can we actually convince people that a skills first approach is it matters and is important, if you can't even articulate the ways in which and for me, the person, this is how I understand my skills are being activated in the role that I am currently in. And so if there is some opportunity for you to also do some understanding of what your skills are, what are you trying to develop? How is your organization positioned to help you develop those skills where there are opportunities, where you can try small things to advance your own skill development, and then recommend some of those things to others, like we have individual agency that we can certainly activate without getting the C suite level endorsement. And so I always encourage folks to think through, what does it look like in the environment that's most local for you, in the environment where you have control, and you certainly have control over your own professional development, and so if there's an area for you to lean in and just understand where you are, I think that that benefits and better informs whatever type of approach you're going to propose that other people jump on. I'll mention we have a here. We are piloting an HR apprenticeship program, registered apprenticeship program, which we're really excited about and also naturally made sense, because HR is the folk. The HR teams are the ones that are trying to convince other teams to take on apprenticeship programs. And so it would make sense for HR to also have an apprenticeship program to understand what the pain points are, because then you can speak to it from experience, as opposed to trying to sell people on a concept or idea where they're going to present to you the challenges, and you might not know how to respond to them, and so, so I always offer that just start local, start with what's in your locus of control, and let's see what lessons you can gain from that that can inform the way that you try and bring and motivate other people to come along. Julian Alssid: Very practical, very grounded. I really appreciate that. As we wind down this conversation, certainly, we want to keep following your work so you know there's watch just you'll see us poking around, and hopefully we can have another conversation when you're a little further down the road with the sound of it. Yeah. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow.  Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Thank you for this question. The center that I speak of is located at skillsfirstfuture.org and so when you visit that site, you'll see all of the components that I've discussed here. You'll see ways where you can tell us if we're missing resources that we should add, or even if you see an article that you thought, oh, this is really interesting. I'd like to share this. We love to hear about that. We have places where you can sign up to hear more about new things as we're developing them, and we will, in the future, be building a community component on there so that people can actually talk to each other about the types of things that they're doing in real time, and hopefully get some feedback there. So skillsfirstfuture.org is where you can learn more about all the things that I've discussed, and where you can plug in and talk to us as we're learning more things about how to accelerate some of this adoption for employers that hopefully will then benefit and inspire job seekers as well. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you for that, Isaac, really appreciate knowing how we can continue to follow this great and exciting new work and really again, appreciate you joining us for this conversation today. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Yes, thank you for having me. This was fun.  Julian Alssid: Thanks so much, Isaac. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation, and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info forward slash podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends, and if you're interested in learning more about Work Forces Consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.

Joe E. Ross, President, CEO and co-founder of Reach University and the National Center for the Apprenticeship Degree, discusses Reach University's "apprenticeship degree" model that turns jobs into degrees rather than the traditional approach of obtaining a job post-graduation. The conversation explores Reach's approach to addressing the "hiding in plain sight" talent crisis by serving the 40-50 million Americans in the workforce without degrees who wish they had them. Ross outlines Reach's three ABCs framework: Affordability, Based in the workplace from day one to graduation, and Credit for learning at work. He shares compelling outcomes from Reach's growth from 67 candidates to over 3,000 across eight states, with 70% graduation rates for Pell-eligible students compared to the typical 40-50%. Ross also discusses the National Center for the Apprenticeship Degree's work with 50 institutions across a dozen states, and offers practical steps for listeners interested in getting involved with apprenticeship degrees.  Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education, industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Hello all, hope you are doing well and enjoying the lead-up to the holiday season. As we prepare for our next podcast season, we're closing out the month with a couple of Work Forces "Rewinds", featuring two insightful conversations from this past year. Today, we're revisiting our conversation with Joe E. Ross, President of Reach University. In this conversation, we dive deep into Reach's pioneering "apprenticeship degree" model, which turns jobs into degrees rather than the traditional approach of obtaining a job post-graduation. We hope you enjoy the discussion with Joe as much as we did. While we'll be back with new episodes in the new year, we want to pause to express our appreciation for you, our listeners.  Julian and I are so grateful for your feedback, your likes and shares, and your overall engagement with the Work Forces podcast. Your encouragement and perspectives continue to shape the conversations we hold and inform our consulting work every day. We'll be back to kick off our next season soon..in the meantime, we hope you enjoy this episode! Julian Alssid: Welcome back today. We're diving deep into a topic that's central to our work, the evolution of higher education to better serve the modern workforce.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, we are Julian. We've talked a lot about the need for new models, especially those that bridge the gap between learning and earning. So many of our conversations have pointed to the power of apprenticeships and skills based pathways, including our past podcast discussions with Bob Lehrman and John Colborn on the evolution of apprenticeships and the opportunities they afford learners and employers alike.  Julian Alssid: That's right. Kaitlan and as we discussed with Bob and John, the apprenticeship movement has been gaining momentum in recent years. Just in August 2025 the Trump administration issued a talent strategy report that calls for the expansion of Federal Registered Apprenticeships, including promoting stronger connections to universities and colleges. Our guest today is at the forefront of this movement, pioneering a groundbreaking model that's reshaping what a degree can look like, the apprenticeship degree. In fact, the apprenticeship degree was called out in the Feds report as a key part of the new apprenticeship initiative. And so today, we'll be discussing this and more with Joe E Ross, President, CEO and co founder of Reach University and the National Center for the apprenticeship degree.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Before building Reach, Joe served as president of the statewide association for county school boards in California, and served for 10 years as a locally elected school board member. He previously served as general counsel to a venture studio in several technology startups, and as a deputy district attorney, he acted as sole counsel in numerous hearings and jury trials. Earlier in his career, he served eight years on active duty in the US Navy. The son of a US Postal Service labor custodian, Joe went on to earn degrees from Yale and Stanford Law School. And Joe, we're excited to welcome you to the podcast with us today. Thanks so much for joining us here.  Joe E. Ross: Kaitlin, Julian, it's such a pleasure to be here. Thanks for having me.  Julian Alssid: Yes, indeed, it is a pleasure to have you, and if you will, you know, we've said a little bit about your background, but we'd love to hear you tell us a little bit more, and the story of what led you to co found Reach. Joe E. Ross: Yeah, sure. So first off, I must offer the disclaimer, I never imagined that I would be a college president growing up. That's not the thing that was on my bucket list, among many things, but I do think I, very early on, acquired a conviction that education is the way you build your own future, I think of it as the pen that you need to have in your hand to write your own future. As you mentioned, my biological father worked for the post office as a labor custodian (that means janitor), and my mom died kind of young, and he was injured in an accident. And I was raised starting at age four by my aunt and uncle, and I think in moving into that new household, in my little head, I must have noticed that these adults had careers and they had degrees and they had power over their lives. And I think in my little head, I thought, I want all three of those things, and I got it into my head that education was my way to those things. That's the only thing I can point to as an explanation for why I was such a nerd in school and so motivated in school, and also why later, after trying all sorts of other things with that pen to my hand, I was a Navy officer, I was a prosecutor, I was an ed tech entrepreneur, I always tacked back to education as where my passion was, and so about 15 years ago, I started running an after school program that sought to turn after school staff into teachers, and that was essentially a job embedded, apprenticeship based program, the first of its kind. And I saw this, this potential of combining work with higher ed. And so fast forward to the fall of 2020, Reach University launched as it's in its current form as an accredited nonprofit institution with a very simple mission, which is to turn jobs into degrees, as you said in the intro, as opposed the other way around. And that model is called the apprenticeship degree. Now.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So you know. Reach University has a unique B2B2C model, right where you partner directly with employers, but you have this dual customer approach of working with employers but also serving the needs of your learners. Can we dive in a little bit there? I mean, this is a complex model to build. How have you gone about it?  Joe E. Ross: Yeah, so it's, it's interesting, it's complex, but it also creates some simplicity as well. If you're running an apprenticeship degree, by definition, you are running a model that's based in the workplace from day one to the day of graduation. In fact, I'll back up. I probably should share for everybody what we mean by apprenticeship degree, and then that will lead lead to the answer. So an apprenticeship degree is defined by elements associated with apprenticeship going back centuries. This is not something that the Department of Labor defined 50 years ago or 10 years ago or this summer. It's something that goes back to a tradition that is very long standing, and apprenticeships had three defining elements that I think of as the ABCs that apply to an apprenticeship degree, a stands for Affordability for the learner, and in this day and age, that means without student debt, apprentices have been asked for their sweat, not for their debt, right? So at Reach University, we made this commitment the beginning, that no one would be would pay out of pocket. No learner would pay out of pocket more than $75 a month for full time enrollment in a full time work embedded degree program that's a for affordability. B stands for Based in the workplace from day one to the day of graduation or the day of completion. An apprenticeship degree starts with a paid job. It ends, or is designed to end, with a better paid job. And C stands for Credit for work, Credit for learning at work. Kind of has a double meaning. Learning at work means literally learning at work, but it also means learning put to work, theory, meaning practice. C also stands for Credential of value. This is not a compromise. It is still a Bachelor of Arts or a Master of Arts or an Associate of Arts. AA does not stand for Apprenticeship Arts Degree. It stands for Associate of Arts degree. So with that definition in mind, let me go back to B based in the workplace. The reason we think of this as a B2B2C model, as opposed to a, B2C model is because you can't run an apprenticeship or an apprenticeship degree without close engagement with employers and for the university. What that means, among many things, is that instead of coming to the university looking for graduates, the employer comes to the university at the front end, bringing the students, you work with employers, and then the employers engage their incumbent workforce, or they actually recruit new employees into jobs that come with degrees. And so what you end up seeing is a lot of partnership work with employers, which is kind of shoe leather and handshaking and presence on the ground, as opposed to buying Google AdWords and competing in the internet for advertising for consumers. And as a result of that, a B2B2C model is much more affordable to execute, and that savings gets passed on to the apprentices, to the learners, in the form of much lower tuition, much more affordability.  Julian Alssid: So Joe, your model, in a sense, is helping to solve labor shortages. And want to hear you talk about, like, who these who these learners are, and what kinds of jobs you're preparing them for. This notion that there's like, this talent, and you know the term like hiding in hiding in plain sight, yeah, is really what you're about, yeah. Joe E. Ross: Well, we started five years ago with our teachers college, and we were focused on the teacher shortage. And by any estimate, there's many as 30 to 50,000 structural vacancies, to as much as 300,000 structural vacancies in teaching. And what we discovered is that in the very same buildings where principals were looking for teachers where there were classrooms without permanent staff, in those same buildings, there were a lot of human beings doing other jobs that didn't require degrees. They were working as classroom aides, as library aides, they were in the lunchroom, they were in the office, driving the bus. They were janitors, like my father and each of these individuals share, typically, the same story. At some point, they had to choose that job instead of a degree to take care of their family. For example, we did some research, because this was anecdotal, and this was something we were seeing on the ground, but we did some research. You know, if you look the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there's about 1.3 to 1.5 million classroom aids in this country, if there's only 50,000 teacher shortages, you only need a fraction of those aids, a fraction of those aides to get upskilled, earn a degree, to just end a teacher shortage. That type of ratio plays out in other high demand industries. If you look at nursing, there's a nursing shortage, but there's also a tremendous number of people working in hospitals as patient care assistants, or certified nursing assistants and many other roles who, if we actually treated those people as the talent we need and give them the opportunity to rise up, we would end these labor shortages and we create this upward mobility that we want this country to stand for. We bring it to life in places, particularly rural places that are education deserts. So that's basically the story here we have, on one hand, estimates suggest about 10 million high demand labor shortages in high demand industries, and on the other hand, there's 40 to 50 million people working in the workforce who do not have a degree, but surveys indicate they wish they did have a degree. And if we can actually move higher ed to think about that population, those 50 million people already in the workforce or about to enter the workforce, as the market for higher ed, as opposed to the 3 million graduating from high school every year, or maybe in addition to the 3 million who are graduating from high school every year, it's such a win, win. Higher ed has a new mission, 50 million people who were left out get brought back in, and we address labor shortages in high demand fields, particularly in rural, remote places where often the only answer is to do a grow your own effort, as opposed to recruiting effort.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Can you tell us a little bit, Joe about how this model works like a practical level. So you said, right? You know, people learners should be, you know, receiving credit for the work that they're doing on the job. But what does it look like to implement this? Joe E. Ross: I think the apprenticeship degree is always met with this kind of, oh, this sounds too good to be true. Somebody can have a paid job. Half the learning in their degree program comes from that paid job. The other half comes from seminars held at night or on the weekends or asynchronous instruction. There's no student debt. There's a better paid job waiting at the end of it. Employers are feeling labor shortages, individuals are getting upward economic mobility, and people are kind of like, well, that's genius. Too good to be true. How do you do you do it? Just like you just asked, here are some things that need to go into the design approach. First, employers to higher education providers need to work really closely together to make sure that the degree design meets the needs of the employer. In many ways, the employer is the customer here. They should be actually, in many cases, paying for the program instead of the learner, right? So you have to work with the employers to design now and teaching that's fairly straightforward, because every state knows what teachers need to know, and it's pretty common across state borders what teachers need to know. Similarly, in other professions like a nursing or radiological technician or other allied health fields, the standards of what you need to know in those professions as well now, but you still need to work with employers to make sure that the program design works. And then from there, the employers are also your key partners. I said earlier in recruiting their incumbent workforce, or their new hires into these pathways with the promise that their jobs are not just job type jobs, but jobs that turn into degrees and then give you upward mobility after completion of a certain set period of time. In terms of the actual design of the model, part of what's required here is to rethink some practices that are often taken as rules or laws or regulations, but are just habits In higher education. And I'll give you one example. There's something called the Carnegie Unit that is about the ratio of seat time to homework time, essentially. And this is seen as a barrier to work embedded degree programs, because, oh my gosh, we had to have this much seat time, and then people have to, have to do this, this much homework, and then they have to work 40 hours a week. How do you fit it all in? And so one of the things that we did from the beginning said, Look, you can reimagine the Carnegie Unit as being a function of seat time and work time as opposed to seat time and homework time, right? So if you can combine seat time with assignments on the job, or sense making around what you're doing on the job instead of mindless, irrelevant problem sets or whatever the case may be busy work. But actually make work work, the work instead of busy work, the work. You can actually create an environment where for a learner, and this is the objective for a worker, one plus one in this case, equals one. It should feel like their job and their higher education pathway are the same thing. That's the key element of efficiency here that needs to go into the design. And then from there, there's things in a higher education credential that people think, Well, how could you do that in the workplace? For example, you need to know English or critical thinking or history or writing, or all these things that are referred to as general education? Well, it turns out you can carefully design the liberal arts component of almost any professional or occupational degree to be relevant to that occupation. We're designing a program right now in behavioral health, for example. And to get an associate or bachelor's degree, you need something that looks like writing and reading and literature for to be a degree, but you can choose something that's relevant. So we have a semester we're designing where there's two tracks of learning. One is psychology, one, two and three, which is with one faculty member, and then there's practice on the job. And the other track is literature, but it's going to be the literature of mental illness, right? And it's going to feel really integrated with the psychology track, and it's going to be relevant to the job. So that's the kind of curricular design work that I think the apprenticeship degree needs to entail. Because at the end of the day, these are working adults, and we know what working adults need, and we sometimes are really good at giving them what they need at the graduate level, but now we have to give them what they need at the undergraduate level to make sure the associate degree in the bachelor's degree truly is working better.  Julian Alssid: It's all about that context, really, and just baking it in all around. So then, given this integration and approach like, what are the metrics that you're using to track and what's your impact today?  Joe E. Ross: Yeah, we started with 67 candidates in our pilot cohort in the Louisiana and Arkansas Deltas. That was five years ago. We'll have well over 3,000 candidates across almost 500 school districts in eight states as of this fall. So the program is growing. That's one metric that's important. And in some places, school districts and parishes are reporting the sentiment that their teacher shortage seems to be going away, which is great news, and in part, that's because of programs like, like Reach University, and that's exciting to see when, when do you get to, like, actually solve a major social problem as a nonprofit leader in your life, it's always something on the horizon. We're actually seeing shortages go away, which is amazing. Notably, the population we're serving are overwhelmingly Pell eligible. And so Pell eligibility, I think, is a good proxy for economic need. And any given semester, roughly 70 to 75% of our enrollment is Pell eligible, 37 to 39 year old folks with families and full time jobs, and so they're eligible for Pell. And the typical graduation rate at the undergraduate level for someone who is Pell eligible is a shocking 40 to 50%. In our program. It's on track to be 70% for all our almost all of our cohorts. And I think actually, we have a tailwind in this case, because the number one reason that people who are Pell eligible drop out is economics. They need a job, but in an apprenticeship degree, they already have a job. So you've removed one of the major barriers to completion of a college degree when you pair the degree with a paid job from beginning to end. And so it's not surprising that we're seeing much better completion rates. We also look at retention, you know, the you know, retention is kind of along the way. The most challenging year for a Pell eligible first generation student is the first year of college. And so you really, you can't lose 30 or 40% in year one and have anything close to a 70% graduation rate, obviously, four years later, five years later, and and so we tracked that first year persistence really carefully, and we constantly, actually redesigned our first year to make sure that our first year candidates would had a better retention. We had some cohorts we didn't really like the numbers, like it was down to 70% for one cohort or 65% for another. And we redesigned our first year to integrate the general education courses and make them more working embedded. And so this first cohort is 91 to 92% retention. That's very, very good for a Pell eligible first year persistence. And then at the end of the program, we absolutely need to look at who, not only how many are completing, but how many of those who complete are actually getting the job that is waiting for them. Very often, if not in the same building, it's in the same employer network or the same community. But how many are actually getting that job, and then in a few years, in how many of them are seeing income gains? And if there's a measure of efficacy in the job, whether it's teaching or allied health, how are they doing as compared to peers who came through traditional pathways? And it's still early days for us, because we just graduated our first set of career graduated our first set of cohorts, but early data look very, very good in terms of both obtaining the job, getting the pay raise, and being rated by their employers as better than, at least equal or better than, in terms of performance folks who came through the traditional pathways.  Kaitlin LeMoine: These are some exciting initial outcomes. I know you said it's early days, but it must be exciting to be seeing these, you know, these types of success metrics, and I'm sure hearing success stories as well, right? Those, those anecdotes and qualitative feedback on on the program. So congratulations on that. I think you started to touch upon it a little bit with the redesign of your first year. I'm curious to know, like, what are some of the challenges you've experienced in these first five years of operation, and maybe give us an example or two on how you've addressed them, because it's certainly, as you said, maybe there's elements of this that simplify higher ed, but it's a really interesting model, and I feel like still relatively new overall in the higher ed landscape.  Joe E. Ross: When we first launched this undergraduate apprenticeship degree, we literally planned the semester right in time, right so we couldn't have any transfer students. We brought people in with no prior credit, and we kind of designed that first semester for them as they took it, and then the second semester was designed just in time, and we went through the whole program designing one term ahead of the first cohort. And then when we had upper division cohorts, we started accepting and transfers. Well, we learned a lesson the first year, because the first year, we actually tried to provide four or five work embedded courses at once to our first year students, which meant they had four or five different faculty at once. I don't know what we were thinking, but it's what we did. And of course, the feedback was, this is great, but this is really hard, right? That was the feedback generally from candidates and assignments were on the same time, and people were trying to remember the name of their faculty and their faculty and their peers and all that. And, at the end of that first year, we said, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, there is a best practice here that it's already out there online higher education does one course at a time. This is a best practice for working adults. We already know that. And I went to the faculty and I said, look, we've got to do one course at a time. We can't do this five courses at once. And there was a little bit of concern because our faculty who, by the way, are job embedded too. So these were folks who are working in schools as principals, assistant superintendents, as master teachers. And they understood what I was saying, but they also were like, you know, I don't think we can get to know the candidates in five weeks if it's a five week course, or in 10 weeks, if it's 10 week course. And so what we decided to do, as we built the second year is designed a single subject, not a course, but a single subject semester. How do we integrate all the courses as one subject area, where one faculty member essentially would teach three or four, three courses back to back, but they were essentially the same type of course. So world history, us, history and social studies for teachers, integrated as one experience, but three courses on the transcript as an example. And so we did that for the second year and the third year and the fourth year, and retention and persistence and satisfaction and outcomes on licensure tests just moved up and to the right and then we finally, as I said earlier, got back to the first year, and we finally redesigned the first year. We're seeing great retention the first year as well. So I think we maybe should have known this before we started, but we essentially delivered to higher ed an AB test of what it looks like to have four or five courses at once, an apprenticeship degree, as opposed to one subject at a time. And the results are kind of overwhelming. Someone should write the paper on this and get tenure somewhere. But that's, that's, that's one of the big lessons we had at the gate.  Julian Alssid: Well, speaking of challenges, Joe, we know that you know your National Center for Apprenticeship Degrees is a thing that you've launched, and that it's working with traditional colleges and universities to adopt an apprenticeship model. Interested to hear about what you're doing there. And you know, we know that, you know you're getting to design this. You know, Reach University from scratch. What's it like? And what are the you know, what are the challenges you're facing with the traditional colleges and universities? And how are NCAD overcoming these challenges?  Joe E. Ross: So we launched NCAD about two years ago. NCAD stands for National Center for the Apprenticeship Degree. And in part, we launched it because we had a teacher's college. And everywhere I went, people would say, this is a great idea. Can you do this in my advanced manufacturing facility over here? That actually happened. I was visiting a school district in West Memphis, and the assistant superintendent said, you have to meet my husband. He runs this factory across the river in Memphis. I was like, okay, so I visit this factory, and they give me a hard hat, which was fun. And they're manufacturing switches for railroad tracks with all this very, very next level equipment. And they take me through the factory to the back, and there's a state of the art classroom where this employer was actually taking people out of high school and putting them through advanced math and engineering classes so they could run the equipment. And he says to me, I should be able to confer an associate degree for all the training I'm doing on the job, and it would make it easier for me to recruit people into this workplace, if I could do that. That story times 100 made it really clear that this idea of an apprenticeship degree was not just for teaching or even allied health, but that this is something that could be part of a larger workforce and human capital strategy across industries, across geographies, and we're a startup nonprofit, the idea that we could address all that demand seemed a little nutty, but we did believe that what we were doing could be something that, together with other innovators, could create a tipping point, and that the larger mission of changing higher education - bringing it into the workplace was something that we could pursue. And so we launched the Center for the Apprenticeship Degree. And your question, I think, touches on the built in challenge there, because essentially, what we're asking higher education to do is to disrupt itself, right? Like classic disruption is about a simpler product that's more relevant to a larger consumer base that's not consuming. So targets non-consumption, and it's supposed to be something much, much less expensive, right? All of those things are really, really hard for big established players to do. Now there's some big established players that have figured out how to do it. You all came from Southern New Hampshire University. Did disruptive things there, ASU does disruptive things Western Governors, but there's 4000 higher ed institutions in this country, and not all of them are going to just drop everything and create a affordable face in the workplace, degree that rewards credit for work. But what we did realize is that there are some who are doing and that this is a field that's emerging, and one of the things you have to attend to in system change is avoiding fragmentation of an emerging, fragile field. So the first thing out of three that NCAT is doing is attending to making sure we're bringing together the emerging field of higher ed institutions and innovative, forward thinking employers who are launching apprenticeship degrees to address talent needs or to get an edge on their competition, whatever their purpose is. And that has been really successful. We've worked with 50 different institutions across over a dozen states where this is beginning to emerge. The second thing we took on with the Center for the Apprenticeship Degrees is, because we're out there in the field, we're we've become aware of who is really doing amazing things in the field. And so when a system or a state or a college wants to launch a program like this, we're able to provide capacity building support. And we've been doing that in Massachusetts and Colorado and a few other states as well. And then finally, there's a need to kind of build an emerging knowledge base about this field. And so NCAD, the National Center the Apprenticeship Degree, is focused on that as well. The challenge here is, I go back to the ABCs I mentioned before. All three of them are really hard. Affordability is hard because since the 1970s most of higher ed has had the assumption of unlimited student debt without underwriting at least at the graduate level, and that's created kind of a lack of discipline around designing high quality things at an affordable price. So that's that's a big challenge. Being based in the workplace means partnering with employers and changing your recruitment, changing your design strategies. It's not that that's hard to do. It's just not in the muscle memory of a lot of places yet. And then C credit for learning at work means giving up some of the sort of ownership and the direct control over where learning happens, and letting the assessment of skills and capacities and knowledge happen in the workplace that's challenging as well. There's a book that came out a while back called Whatever It Is I'm Against It, by a former college president, and it points to how it's how hard it is, generally in higher ed to work through committees. Committees don't generally drive innovation, but that's it's actually more complex than that, a degree is something that has the fingerprints of dozens of departments. It's not just the school of education that gives you a teaching degree or the school of nursing that gives you a nursing degree. They need to provide general education, which means they have to negotiate with history and anthropology and sociology and all these places that are providing these other courses and making them work. Embedded is possible, but it's a big change. And so at NCAD, the best thing we can do is not tell people what to do, but to surface examples of other places that are similarly situated, that have actually done this. And in Alabama, the phrase that I first heard, I first heard, I first heard in Alabama from the director of apprenticeship in Alabama. The key here is R&D, which stands for rip off and duplicate, meaning like, if we can actually at NCAD, enable folks who are trying to innovate to know what others are doing and steal from them. That's the theory of change here. Because innovators and entrepreneurs, whether they're in academics or technology, do not want to be told what to do, but they're very happy to steal from steal from others. It's kind of the congenital approach of an entrepreneur. So at NCAD, we're trying to make it easy for people to steal from each other, steal from us, and steal from each other, so that this model, which is such a great model, can grow and expand and be more available.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So I would say, building off that point, Joe, you know, we always ask, What practical steps could you provide to our audience around becoming forces in developing apprenticeship degrees? I mean, we could take it from the perspective of, you know, a new employer partner or, like you're saying, a traditional, a more traditional college or university that's interested in pursuing this out of an approach. Joe E. Ross: I think wherever you sit, whether you're an employer or an educator or a policymaker, I think the first step is to stop being part of a system that forces to choose, people to choose between a job and a degree. So ask, what can we do to convert jobs into degrees that then enable people to have the opportunity to be skilled up and to rise up in their workplace. So for employers, one of the one of the big opportunities here, I think, is to move from thinking of education as a benefit, which many employers already already do, to thinking about jobs that are designed to confer qualifications, certificates, and degrees by design. Because if your jobs are not dead end, but instead developmental, you attract a different kind of talent. And there's so many young people right now, including my own children, who are out of college, who judge the quality of a job by what they think they will learn and what people will see that they have learned in that job. So think about jobs as places where your workplace becomes kind of a college campus. I think that's the call to action for employers, for higher ed leaders. I think that getting around this idea that you can deliver quality but also be radically affordable. It's hard for some to imagine, but it's eminently doable, and part of the way you do that is letting your employers drive your enrollment strategy, which saves a ton of money. And number two, really looking for effective ways leveraging technology and and best practices to award credit for work. Everyone knows that doing is a way of learning. Learning by doing is the expression, right? But that doesn't have to water down the academic enterprise. You could do so much sense making with what people are doing on the job. That makes it still true higher education. And then finally, I'd say policymakers, we're strong advocates of policymakers at the federal, state, local level, looking for ways to bring forth predictable funding that has incentives for affordability and outcomes built in unlimited debt does not incent affordability and full time enrollment dollars don't necessarily incent outcomes. So I think the challenge here for policymakers is, how do you set up mechanisms that cause the market to answer the call? If I knew that if somebody completed X amount of credit and learning in x, in y, amount of time, I would be paid Z, amount of dollars upon proven completion. I take that deal every day because I know my program achieves those outcomes, and it's a better use of public dollars, as opposed to sort of stuffing the channels, which is what we've done over the last 50 years. Basically just make it easier for people to go in debt, make it easier for people to go, encourage everybody to go. That's gotten us into this, right? So I think policymakers have a real opportunity here, with the changes that we're seeing at the federal and state level to incentivize apprenticeship degrees, to deliver the kind of outcomes that I'm talking about. And I think actually we're going to see some movement here on this front I actually think there's a lot of conversation. It is a bipartisan issue. Everybody seems to love the idea of apprenticeship, and everybody loves the idea of an apprenticeship that leads to a degree. So I think there's a lot of hope to be had here on this front.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, no, it's so true. It is definitely. And I kind of was implying that in my little first comments, that this is, you know, there's been this growing movement, and it's totally bipartisan. And I think a lot of the challenge has been that, you know, it's perceived as really hard to do and come and bureaucratic and cumbersome and and what's been so wonderful talking to you is how you know, clear eyed you are about this, how you break it down, you know. And obviously there's a lot of complexity, and I'm sure there's way more, many more challenges as of course, there always are. But that, you know, here you have this entrepreneurial pursuit that's getting things done. You have some strategies for the the legacy institutions and and, you know, at a time when there's really heightened interest and it's all over the place. Everyone's got issues. Employers can't find the talent they need. People don't want to go into debt forever and get nothing in return. And so I guess the perfect start winding down. Would love to hear from you about how our listeners can learn more and continue to follow your work. Joe E. Ross: Well, great. I love the opportunity to invite people to visit our website and invite people to visit our social media channels. Reach.edu is where you can find Reach University. Join us there if you are interested in the National Center for the apprenticeship degree at ncad.org, N-C-A-D dot org, we have a podcast. It's called Apprenticeship 2.0. It comes out every two weeks, so tune in, and we'll actually tell people to tune into your podcast as well, because this is a great conversation for people to tune into, and the other ones have been as well. We're on LinkedIn. We post a lot of LinkedIn if you're truly interested in getting involved in this movement, if you email [email protected] someone, someone will get back to you and connect you to a way to get involved in launching and expanding the apprenticeship degree movement the United States. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you for sharing all of those various avenues for people to get involved and learn more. And appreciate you joining us on show today. Joe E. Ross: It's been a pleasure. Thanks for having me and I look forward to to the continued conversation. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation, and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info, forward slash podcast. You can also find  Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about workforces consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.

Amber Garrison Duncan, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Competency-Based Education Network (C-BEN), discusses the evolution of competency-based education from seven pioneering institutions in 2013 to over 600 institutions and 1,000 programs today. Drawing from her experience assessing co-curricular learning outcomes in traditional higher education and later as a grantmaker at Lumina Foundation, Garrison Duncan explains how CBE restores the promise of economic mobility by focusing on mastery of skills rather than seat time. She details C-BEN's systems-level work through initiatives like the Center for Skills and the Partnership for Skills Validation, which build consensus across K-12, higher education, and employers on quality standards for skills assessment and validation. The conversation explores how policy shifts like Workforce Pell and state-level innovations in Alabama, Arkansas, and Texas are accelerating the movement toward skills-based credentials, financial aid, and talent management systems. Duncan emphasizes the urgency of iterative innovation, comparing the current moment to the iPhone era where institutions must test and adapt quickly rather than waiting for lengthy pilot programs, and offers practical guidance for institutions to begin their CBE journey using C-BEN's Quality Framework while building authentic connections between learning outcomes and employer needs. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces Consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort, please check out our workforces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. Julian Alssid: You know, Kaitlin, it feels like just yesterday, but it was actually over a dozen years ago now that we were helping to launch College for America at Southern New Hampshire University, which was one of the very first competency-based education models. And back then CBE, it felt like a radical experiment, you know, trying to prove that demonstrating mastery of competencies and not seat time in a course was the key metric to helping people advance their education and careers. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, it's true. And while it does feel like that was just yesterday, the competency based movement has come so far in so many years. While CBE is still viewed as an alternative, non traditional approach by some in the field of education and training, many institutions have and are continuing to holistically implement competency based models to go beyond the traditional credit hour and ensure a curricular emphasis on what learners can do with what they know, and as we think about the intersection of work and learning in which we're all operating, this movement has only been further strengthened as employers further focus on skills based hiring and learners seek to clearly communicate their skills and abilities in a competitive job market. Julian Alssid: Yes, and our guest today is with an organization that's been central to growing the CBE field, Amber Garrison Duncan is Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Competency-Based Education Network, or C-BEN. In her role, Amber spearheads initiatives to strengthen collaboration between education and workforce partners with a focus on competency and skill taxonomies and quality assurance before C-BEN, Amber spent eight years as a grant maker at Lumina Foundation, focusing on higher education success. And in her early career, she served in numerous Student Affairs roles at the University of Oregon, Florida State University, the University of Michigan, Hope College, and Texas A&M University. Amber, we're so excited to welcome you to the podcast. Thanks so much for joining us. Amber Garrison Duncan: Well, thank you for having me. It's so exciting to think back to those early days and just also how far we've come. So it's a good moment to reflect. And so thank you for this opportunity. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, thank you for joining us and for taking this moment in time to both reflect, and I guess maybe, you know, we'll spend a little time thinking about what's ahead as well. So I'm really glad to see you today for this conversation. Amber, and as we get started, we'd love to hear a little bit more about your background and what led you to your role at C-BEN, sure. Amber Garrison Duncan: Well, as you probably heard in my introduction, I had quite a bit of experience on a couple of campuses in higher ed, and are some of what I would call today our legacy institutions that have been around a long time and really are major leaders when you think about higher education. But in my experience there, I was doing assessment in the co-curriculum, and so I was not working in courses, and I was not working in time based measures. I was working on how students apply what they know and can do? How are they doing that and their co-curricular experiences or at work? And then at the University of Oregon, we were just getting to the point where saying, can we validate this and put it on a record for somebody? And so I was having that experience and also saw how hard it was to do, how much of a change it was to think about. Could people be learning outside of the four walls of this classroom, outside this desk, and where are they taking this knowledge? How would I know? And so from that just knew that also it was a lot of change, and was tired as a change maker, banging my head against the wall. So I said, Where else can I go? This is a systemic issue that, again, I worked at institutions across the country. Why is this so hard? And so then decided to pursue something that could support more of the system's change, and was lucky enough to be at Lumina for that which was a really transformative experience for me to see how the ecosystem is set up, why there's a lot of these incentives and barriers to change. And had the fortune to be leading a portfolio called Learning Infrastructure, and that was a portfolio focused on how we make sure that all high quality learning can count. And I learned there that the only way to maybe do that is, if we were to work in competencies and skills. Other countries around the world were figuring this out. We had to figure it out in the US. And luckily, there were seven institutions that said, Hey, we're already trying this Southern New Hampshire being one of those. And so C-BEN's origin story really is, how do we learn as quickly as possible from these seven institutions. Now that was back in 2013 when we were having that initial meeting and conversation. Today we have over 5000 members. There's no way to track fully and know how many CBE programs there are in the US, but we know there's well over 600 institutions that we know of, over 1000 programs. So it's kind of fascinating when we think about turning the ship in higher ed and how hard that is, and that in just 10 years time, we've gone from those early days to where we are now that really are proving out that CBE is a way to provide greater access. It's a way to ensure mastery, for that every learner gets the quality education and the skills they need. And then employers, again, are very much leaning forward to doing their skills based hiring by connecting with CBE programs. So that's like a quick evolution, and my history is just it's all tied up together in those two pieces. And so once I left Lumina, I just said, I really want to continue to be a part of this and continuing to help lead change. And so now I've been at C-BEN for four years, which, again, time flies, but a lot of really exciting progress to see and be a part of people's stories and watch our community grow. Julian Alssid: It is quite a quite a story, and you're right in the thick of it, Amber. And so looking back, you know, you mentioned the seven institutions initially. I'm pretty sure we were, we were one of them at College for America.  Amber Garrison Duncan: You were the home of C-BEN at SNHU, yeah. Julian Alssid: Looking back, what are some of the key moments in the evolution of CBE since those early days that led to the growth we see today? Because it really is quite remarkable. Amber Garrison Duncan: It is, it is. Also a couple of things, I would say is we also like to remind folks that CBE, if we look at the theory and science of learning this, goes back 100 years. I mean, we all probably, if we came up through education, we're big fans of John Dewey and thinking about all this. And so it's, it's kind of interesting as like, the old ideas that have new ways of implementing and scaling. And I think that was always our problem, as you looked at the movement in the cities, that people really again, University Without Walls, and we're really trying to do this, but again, it's hard to do this without new tools. And our tools of the moment were not really there. And so early leaders, as technology started to be used in higher ed to say, Can we do this async? Can we do this in a more flexible way? Can we, you know, again, recognize what people already know and can do and move them on a personalized pathway, not treat everybody as a cohort and teach them all the same thing at the same time, right? So as we started to see that world move, I think that's where CBE started to take hold, and it was a lot of early online learning institutions saying, hey, let's try this thing out where, yeah, we've got this moving async, and we know we can kind of personalize this. But what if we did this instead of again based on time and a module that, again, it's based on as soon as you master and being able to lift that is, again, it's no small task. But certainly, I think early movers were trying to reach people that they hadn't been able to serve before. They were trying to make sure that, again, what they were asking people to perform and know and do was relevant. Had payoff for those individuals and those residents in the way that we all hope, that it led to family sustaining wages, that, to me, it was about restoring the promise of higher ed that we really are about economic mobility, and we needed to try something new to reach people in ways that we hadn't before. And so that, I think, has been, as I hear over and over those 600 institutions talking about why they're trying to do this is they're trying to reach people who just wouldn't have maybe come to us before, wouldn't have been able to have that learning. And again, they want to make sure that if I ask you to spend that one Pell Grant, you get, or that Workforce Pell piece, or that that's your one shot for a lot of people. And I want to make sure it's worth it to you, and that you get, again, that economic return, and so CBE really is the solution to provide that. Kaitlin LeMoine: So building off your last comment there Amber, just around, you know, Workforce Pell and where we're headed, right? I mean, we'd love to hear, you know, what are some of the pressing challenges that you see as institutions and organizations seek to work? Work in this complex landscape, and where are there opportunities, especially around, you know, building a skills based ecosystem that involves all these parties, and really not only involves them, but I guess, allows them to collaborate and work together effectively. Amber Garrison Duncan: You know, I think Workforce Pell is a is kind of a bellwether in the policy incentives and things that will start to shift to reward and make sure that we're paying for things that have, again, return on investments, whether that's, you know, we've been working deeply in Alabama and helping them shift their credentials of value onto what are the skills, not just the labor market demand signal and the but what are the actual skills people need, and how do we make sure those credentials are delivering on those skills, and we're paying for that, not just a completion so again, I think Workforce Pell is starting to lean that way. I think more of the accountability measures are going to be headed that way, and quality assurance being tied to that. So I think that's a huge lever for the work that we're doing, and why people can kind of land on this as a solution to answer that. But again, it comes with a lot of challenges. We are, I say we go everywhere skills go. But if you look at where skills go, it's all the proxies of time that are attached to that, so the credit hour and the just getting into the like, where do I go find a person's skills? Well, I've got to go into the LMS, and I've got to hack the course, and then I've got to hack the assessment platform and the la, la, la, la. And it's like, holy cow. So it's definitely not without challenge. And I do feel like, for the first time, we have again, the market has shifted, and people are starting to say we do need to pay attention to how hard that is. Oh, we do need to say again, should we rethink financial aid based on time and maybe have competency based measures? States again are starting to lead the way in that again Alabama, California. Folks are trying to think about new ways to pay for learning based on skills and competencies and not seat time. We're starting to see Arkansas. Just this morning. I was just reading. They were like, we're not going to call it non credit anymore. It's professional skills learning. And like, why do we again have everything attached to credit? Non credit and hours and time and again. I think that we'll continue to explore, but I do think that it also represents a revisioning of the social contract and thinking about how we pay for things as a society at a moment in time when everything feels very disrupted. But how do we have the forum and the space to talk about what that means, and again, disperse funds, or have policies or have employer engagement in these ways that we all feel comfortable with. And so that's where C-BEN, we're spending a lot of our time. How are we building consensus? How do we reshape a system and not replicate things of the past? As we were getting on, we were talking about, we now have an apprenticeship track at our conference, and we have K-12 coming. And I think now that we're starting to see all these innovators are coming up, looking up and saying, let's not build systems the way that we had them before that we don't like. Let's connect them, because people are trying to move between them. And how do we use skills and competencies to do that? And again, find new ways and new paths in this kind of reimagining using skills as the foundation. And that's what gets me too really excited, but that, again, it's a lot of challenge that we're going to have to face, because now we're talking about admissions policies, and we're talking about dual enrollment, we're talking about things that we have we thought we solved, and now we're figuring out we didn't quite solve them, and we'd like to do better. But that is, is, I think the challenge of where we go next is, how do we build together so that as we're innovating, we don't run past each other, or we don't change one side of the system and not the other. People still need that lifelong learning journey, and we've got to be able to again collaborate to do that. Julian Alssid: So it really is this big systemic issue, and it sounds like C-BEN has been spending quite a bit of time thinking about this and trying to build and scale solutions that cut across the education and employer landscape. You know, I will say, while I agree Workforce Pell's, you know, certainly a bellwether. You know, it's not going to be a lot of money. How do we get solutions that have the employers and educators working in new ways at scale. And what do you guys see being done to advance this? You know, like we want to hear about your, you know, your new Center for Skills and the Partnership for Skills Validation. Amber Garrison Duncan: Yes, Workforce Pell, it's going to be a small amount, but it is our first dip in something different, right, a little bit, but still tied to the credit hours, so we still have to figure that out. But baby steps, baby steps, it is, it's a baby step, it's a baby step, it is a big baby step. But I certainly, through the Center for Skills, as we are observing, again, this growth. We said, how do we get to the intersection? And so. That's where the Center for Skills really comes in and says, if we're really talking about not just skills, as in, like, what's the sentence that describes skills we're talking about, what are the new types of evidence we need to base these policy decisions on? If we're saying people should be awarded or recognized based on mastery and demonstration of skill, for award of a credential. But we're also seeing again, employers saying, I want to hire people based on that mastery. I want to pay them. We're seeing a couple weeks ago, I was at Walmart and they gathered a lot of their peers, from Home Depot to Best Buy, saying, how do we restructure our performance based talent management structures. How are we incentivizing people? How do we pay people? How do we provide recognition for their skills? That's a huge shift. Again, collectively, for all of us to be having that conversation. But again, we can't just say, What do I slap a label on, but what's the performance evidence? And that's where the Center for Skills is trying to say, let's have that conversation at the intersection of what assessment means at the end of the day, and that our perceptions and the ways that we've traditionally done assessment has to shift and change. All of us, you know, if we're older than 20, probably are used to standardized tests and multiple choice, and those are great knowledge tests. Those are things we know we can do with great rigor and validity and reliability. But what we're talking about now is a new world where things are based on demonstration of skill. It's what I know, it's what I can do. What are the different contexts I can do that in? So it's a much richer, nuanced conversation, and that means we have to have new assessment tools and new ways of understanding that and that we shouldn't, again, back to this concept of like we shouldn't go build those separate from each other. If we're trying to all use the same evidence, how do we agree? How to create that evidence? What does quality look like? So that's really what the Partnership for Skills Validation is driving that consensus from K-12 to gray, employer to here, you know, we just released the common language. How do you just talk about this in the most common way possible, demonstration of skill performance. We're observing people and their behaviors at work, or we're observing people in their learning experience. How do we talk about it? And then again, what does quality look like, and how do we scale it? And that's what we're trying to drive that conversation and be that catalyst for consensus, so that, again, these things don't get created separate from each other, and then they don't work together. Kaitlin LeMoine: It's really amazing the work you're doing at all these levels, right? The systems it sounds like you're at the systems level. You're at the very tactical level of what does this look like to implement at one institution, or like, how do you change your technical systems to support this work, and then working across stakeholder groups and developing that shared language? I mean, it's an incredible amount of work happening simultaneously. I guess I'm wondering, how do you go about kind of speaking across your own team around some of this learning? Yeah, I imagine you're working at all these different levels and there must be some shared learnings, but also distinct things as well that maybe drive you in directions or directions you didn't expect.  Amber Garrison Duncan: Absolutely. It's like we, I'm just reflecting on we've, we've had to redo our own communications internally because of this, and part of this, I mean, the beauty of our team right now, you know, we talked about the field growing. Our team grew. You know, we had three people three years ago. We're now 25 people and these folks come from, from all the places we're working, right? So we have folks who come from. I built a higher ed program. I was a dean. I'm an instructional designer, I'm a state policy person. So we all have this lens internally that we bring to the problem solving. And so we really are solving it from every angle but, but we have to follow our own advice and internally go, what did you learn from that project? What did you learn? How are we connecting this up? Did you go let so and so, like we learned this from this institution, please go let their state policy maker know, because it is the full systems change and trying to follow and learn from each other as fast as we can, so that we can either reflect that back out to the field or again, help connect people who are trying to solve a common problem and may not realize that they're actually friends in the movement, And they should know each other, and you know, they would go further faster if they were to again resolve the policy barrier at the same time that they're building their program. So it is a unique moment to do that, but it does take just as much to work internally within the organization as it does to push this stuff out and to be able to support people on the ground and in the spaces that they're working. But I think that's unique in that we don't just do policy, we don't just do practice. We are really saying, Where do policy and practice meet, and how do they become truly informing each other over time. Julian Alssid: Amber, are there particular places where you're finding the most traction in kind of spreading the space? Putting the word and the kind of cross pollination work.  Amber Garrison Duncan: I do think some of the states we've been able to work in have just been tremendous partners to us. Alabama, again, I think, is our most visible support of a full state movement to competencies and skills across the full lifelong of learning, all of that being then represented out in the talent triad so that every employer at every citizen, citizen in the state can participate in a skills based transformation, certainly partnering then with Arkansas and their launch program. But also just, I would be remiss to say KCTCS and our early they were one of the early seven institutions as a system, they continue their great work and and, you know, we just supported the Kentucky CPE (Council for Postsecondary Ed) to build a competency model that takes their K-12 profile of a graduate and extends that up into the associate's degree and the bachelor's degree. So again, you start to see all of these institutions that have been innovating now impacting their systems. You know, we have TBR which has three staff. Tennessee Board of Regents has three staff focused on CBE build out. Those are tremendous amount of change. And again, it shows, I think, a desire to say, how do we solve this on the ground? But we know systems change is hard, and we have to have our systems changing alongside this and working together and just states taking leadership. I will say too, we have a lot of our legacy institutions coming to the fold. University of Kansas, huge leadership in building CBE programs. We just worked with them to launch a research journal for CBE so you could see, even the folks who maybe we wouldn't assume would be at the table, you know, are at the table, University of Nebraska, Lehigh University redesigning their first year experience for engineering students based on competency. So lots of, again, folks coming to the table who you'd be like, oh yeah, I would assume that. But also some folks, you're like, I never would have thought. How cool, you know. So that's pretty fun to see. Kaitlin LeMoine: That's great. I guess you're taking us in this direction anyway, Amber, but I'll ask the question explicitly, what are a few practical steps you would recommend that our audience can take to become forces in supporting the growth of the competency-based education movement. And please feel free to take this question to the systems level, nitty gritty, wherever you want to take it. Amber Garrison Duncan: We have kind of begun to think about CBE as not just a pedagogy, but a way of thinking about what we do, no matter where we're doing that work. And I think that's why, again, we have folks coming from research to policy to tech to whatever is that? What are we trying to really build? Is that that we want people to be able to engage in a learning experience that is authentic and real and based on what we know about how people learn that's a model, or I want to think about against being so outcomes driven, that whatever I'm asking people to engage in actually gets them where they want to go. And that's where the connection with employers, and it just leads you to this place where you're saying, Where am I the folks I'm serving? Where are they coming from? Where are they trying to go, and what am I putting in the black box here so that they can get there? And that our policies and structures should reinforce that, not again other things that we've used in the past. And so we just are, we'll be releasing a math pathways project where we sat down and said, What is, what do people have to know and be able to do around math today? Well, in that project, it just led us to the faculty, Gen, Ed math faculty, who said, I never sit down with an employer before. I had no idea. That's what nurses did with math today. But because this is an orientation to how we think about learning. We have to start with the employer, and then we're coming back and saying, okay, now that I know that again, what is it that I then help somebody know and be able to do? And how do I shift that? So it really is transformational and just a process of thinking. And then I've said to a friend once, it's kind of like in the matrix, where you're like, You take the blue pill, and you're like, I can't see it. Like, okay, this is how learning should look, and this is how it should happen. Is that it should be relevant to where I'm trying to go again, it should be flexible. Should mean something to me, and it should be applied. And that's, that's what CBE is. Julian Alssid: So Amber, I've done some poking around the C-BEN side, which looks great, and it's chock full of good information. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Amber Garrison Duncan: A couple of things, I would say is one on our website, become a friend of C-BEN. It's free. Gets you to make sure that you have a newsletter and access to a network and community of people who are trying to work on all these issues and problem solve together. So that's a very first easy step, low hanging fruit. And then the second thing I would tell you to start with is look at the Quality Framework. Our Quality Framework is, as far as we know, the only one exists in the world. We have people come globally who say, I found your Quality Framework. We don't have anything like this in Saudi Arabia, or we don't have anything like this in Singapore, or we don't have anything like this. And so we find people starting there and saying, What does quality look like? Because if I'm going to innovate, I want to make sure I'm doing that with quality. And then the other piece, I would say, is take that and then go try to do it in new ways. We always say, too, there's not one way to do CBE, because your learners are different, your employers are different, and that is an okay thing that is that's very hard for us to get out of the mindset of an education where it's like, well, there's a this response and this intervention should look like this, and it's like, that's not we've not found out to be true. And so take that quality framework, try it out, but start somewhere. This is the thing we know. This is a transformative journey. This is not a quick, quick fix. This is an 18 month fix. But once you work that muscle and you start, it's kind of like a workout program. Start the workout program. Just keep going and showing up every day and solving for that next problem, and you will be transformed at the end of it into something that is again, more relevant to learners and employers. And we're seeing enrollments go up. We're seeing great outcomes for individuals, but you have to get on the road, and I would say, the sooner you get on the road, the better. Again, we're not seeing the slowdown. We're actually seeing it accelerate. There are now, again, policy. We're just talking with all the Texas people. Texas legislators passed a House Bill 4848 that said every public system of learning has to have at least one CBE program in certain in-demand fields, and they have to have it in a year. So folks are again, getting on, which is kind of scary. That's scary because that's fast. That's really fast, but I think that is, again, a bellwether of people are tired of the status quo and need something different from us, and so we're going to have to do something so just grab the Quality Framework, get to work, trying some things. Let us know how we can help. Kaitlin LeMoine: Really appreciate that. Amber, I think you know, I feel like I'm so struck by the number of conversations we have on this podcast that end with, start small, start somewhere. Let's make sure we get going, even if you don't have everything worked out, because if you don't get started, you can never really move the needle or see where the points of pain are, or see where the points of innovation are. So really appreciate that call out. It feels so critical, especially at this moment in time where, yeah, like you're saying, things are moving very quickly.  Amber Garrison Duncan: I always, and this is probably, like, silly, but I always use the example too, of the iPhone in higher ed. We have been so research oriented. Again, I got to try it and pilot it and learn from it for three years. We don't have three years. We have an iPhone moment of get something out there, collect data. Change. Change every six weeks, if you need to. But that is the pace and the urgency of now that is going to require us to work differently. We can't wait for five year program reviews. You better be getting in there with those employers. And in that Alabama example, for the Credentials of Value, we're meeting quarterly to review labor market demand and change updating skill sets. So that's again, when I talk about pace of change, it's going to feel very chaotic, but use your data and insights to ground you and do it more frequently than we've ever done it before. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, thank you so much for taking the time to join us today. Amber for this conversation. I mean Julian, I think I think I can speak for us both when I say this topic is very near and dear to our hearts. And you know, we're so excited to have been able to take some time with you to get the current and future state of the field, lay of the land. Really, really appreciate this dialog.  Amber Garrison Duncan: Absolutely. Thank you for having me, and you're always a friend of the movement, you you are. You are the sparks of the movement. So it's been fun to reconnect. Julian Alssid: Thank you so much, Amber, really, really do appreciate the reconnect. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell, if you're interested in sponsoring the podcast, or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info, forward slash podcast. You can also find workforces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends, and if you're interested in learning more about workforces consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.  

Dan Gonzalez, Co-founder and CEO of District C, discusses how his nonprofit is democratizing access to authentic workplace learning through Teamship, a reimagined internship model where teams of high school students solve real business problems. Drawing from his background as a physics teacher and education entrepreneur, Gonzalez explains how District C emerged from early conversations about AI's impact on work and the need to develop uniquely human, durable skills. He details the program's innovative design—breaking abstract concepts like "teamwork" into observable behaviors and coaching protocols—and shares how they've made the model accessible to over 7,000 students by embedding it in Career and Technical Education courses. Gonzalez describes their low-lift, high-impact approach to employer engagement that requires just five hours of business partner time across four to five weeks, enabling 700 employers to participate without the complications of traditional internships. The conversation explores their test-and-learn philosophy from startup through scaling, the dramatic student improvement across multiple cycles, and practical strategies for both educators seeking to implement experiential learning and employers wanting to support youth development while addressing real business challenges. Transcript Julian Alssid Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education, industry, and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces Podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in.  Welcome to today's show. It feels like every day we're both reading and hearing about the importance of experiential learning opportunities for students while enrolled in college, and more and more so in K through 12 education, while the importance of these opportunities has been recognized for many years, efforts to develop authentic applied learning in real world contexts at scale have become front and center.  Julian Alssid: It's so true, Kaitlin, we're seeing a significant alignment around this. More employers are actively seeking practical, applied skills earlier in the talent pipeline, and educators and learners alike are seeing the value of academic learning applied in real world work environments. Authentic projects are becoming an integral and essential part of the learning experience. Kaitlin LeMoine: Exactly, and with all that being said, we're really looking forward to our discussion today with Dan Gonzalez, co-founder and CEO of District C, a national nonprofit that prepares the next generation of diverse talent for modern work. District C offers a unique program called Teamship, which is a reimagined internship where teams of students solve real problems for real businesses. Julian Alssid: To provide a bit of background. Dan studied engineering at Dartmouth College before becoming a high school physics teacher. After teaching, Dan joined Manhattan Prep, a global leader in test preparation, and became president of the company in 2011 shortly after it was acquired by Kaplan. In 2017, Dan co-founded District C and has been working on its build out since. We're thrilled to have you on the podcast, Dan, and thanks so much for joining us.  Dan Gonzalez: My gosh, thanks for having me. I'm excited to be here.  Kaitlin LeMoine: We're really excited to have the chance to speak with you today, Dan. So as we get started today, we'd love to learn a little bit more about your background and what led you to founding District C. Tell us the story.  Dan Gonzalez: Yeah, so one, one interesting, what I think is an interesting kind of founding story about the founding is my wife and I started District C together as co-founders. We started our research back in 2016 and we both quit our jobs at the same time to invest full time in District C. And I think what we were seeing at the time was, you know, obviously people have been talking about artificial intelligence for many, many decades, but around 2016, 2017 the conversation started to come into the national forefront as it relates to work and preparing for work. And we were kind of trying to look ahead and imagine what do we need to be preparing students for if we are kind of confronting this reality of an AI dominated workplace, and so, you know, at the time, this was a couple of years after the code.org put out that video, and there was kind of this national movement around preparing students to be coders and software developers. And the thing that we are trying to imagine is, all right, if, if we are thinking about how to prepare young people for any job in the future with the skills and competencies they need to cut across any industry, how would we design a learning model that would do that? Now you can call them professional skills, durable skills, soft skills, 3Cs, 5cs, 10, Cs whatever you want to call them, but these like uniquely human skills, and that's what we were after, and that's what we set out to try to figure out.  Julian Alssid: So you were you? You were talking AI practically before it was born. Dan Gonzalez: Maybe, maybe not, not so, so early. But I would say, Yeah, we were thinking about it back then. And I think, like, obviously looking back now, we feel like it was the right place to be focused. And I would say one challenge we had early on as we were thinking about building a program like the one we built, is a lot of conversation was centered on, as I said, coding, entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial education. And so it was hard to cut through some of that conversation. And even though there was a lot of discussion around portraits of a graduate, how do we help students develop durable skills, soft skills, the default in education, as you all know, is to kind of generally come back to the content and focus on the content. And so things like coding, entrepreneurship, etc., stem where content tends to be at the front and center, those are the things that tend to carry the day in education conversations. So we had a little trouble initially, kind of cutting through some of that and really trying to focus on all right, if we're serious about durable skills, how do we really get down past the abstractions into learning models that really help students develop these things. And so it took, you know, a couple of years of trial and error and experimentation with the model that we built before we started to kind of feel like the conversation was changing.  Julian Alssid: Okay, so, how? So, how are you teaching durable skills? What is the program model? Yeah, yeah. This is the question everyone wants to know. Dan Gonzalez: So the program model is called Teamship. You can think of Teamship as a reimagined team-based internship, where teams of students solve real problems for real businesses in the community, and all the while, they're getting coached by an educator who's been trained and certified by District C and so students are getting proactive support as they're going through this generally 25 to 35 hour experience. The thing that we learned early on was putting students in teams and asking them to solve a real problem actually ended up being the easy part of the model. Of course, it takes work to go out and find businesses, engage them, prep them, Tee them up for the experience, etc. And that's a whole system of work that requires attention and care. But I think what we learned was the most difficult part was helping students actually get better at the work. So it's not enough just to create the experience and create the context for the experience to help students actually develop these skills, you actually have to coach them proactively and consistently, and as I mentioned before, kind of break away from the abstractions and get down to observable behavior. So just as an example, if I were to say Julian and Kaitlin and I'm watching you do your Teamwork, you're solving a problem for a business. Just keep in mind, be team players. Respect your teammates. Those are abstractions, right? Students don't really know what to do with that, that kind of coaching. So what we try to do is break those abstractions down into ways of working, tools, protocols, et cetera, that we can coach students on and actually observe those in their work. Instead of, Hey, be great team players. I might say, hey, Julian and Kaitlin, which set of your tools do you think you can pull out to make sure that you're getting better equity of voice in your team conversations, and they should know like, Oh, if I take tool X, I and Z and snap them together, it will create more balance of voice in our team conversation, and our work is going to be better. Our thinking is going to be better, our ideas are going to be better. Trying to break away from the abstractions and get down to the observable behavior. I think that was an insight we had early on that we really tried to build off of in subsequent years.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So I feel like that response has...now I have so many other questions about the program model, but I mean, I guess one area I'm curious to hear a little bit more about is so you partner with employers and with schools to offer this program. And what is, what does the program the 25 to 35 hour model, what does that look like in schools? Is it held after school? Is it during the school day? Is it held in collaboration with a classroom instructor? Is there a range?  Dan Gonzalez: Yeah, great question. So most of the Teamship experiences that students get are through their schools. And so you're exactly right. We generally partner with Career and Technical Education departments, so at the school district level, at the K 12 level, and then we work with them to identify schools that are going to adopt the Teamship model, to identify teachers that are going to go through our training and certification process. And then we support these teachers in implementing teamship In generally one of two ways. The first way is as a 25 to 30 hour experience embedded in one of their existing courses. The second way is building an entirely new course that is Teamship exclusive. So imagine a semester-long course where students do two or three Teamship cycles over the span of a semester, and each cycle, they're with a different team of students, and they're working on a new problem for a new business. So that's generally that's the predominant model, and the reason for that is, I know from, you know, back when I was young, I thought I wanted to be an engineer. I got an engineering internship because my dad knew someone, right? So I asked my dad, hey, could you help me get an internship within a week? I had it. I think we know that students with family connections and social capital, they generally don't struggle to get these kinds of experiences. But what about everyone else? So one of the keys to the Teamship design was building it so that it could be delivered and provide access to many more students than typically get these kinds of powerful workplace learning experiences. And that meant designing it so that it could be implemented at school during the school day. So that was a key kind of design constraint that we went into many years ago when we built this. Kaitlin LeMoine: I would imagine too to have the opportunity to engage in multiple of these experiences over a learner's journey through their high school experience would be really powerful to, as you said, build upon and continue to practice and learn some of these human or durable skills that you know take time to learn and hone, right? I mean, it's not like this isn't just because you've engaged in one of these experiences doesn't mean you couldn't engage in another, I assume. Dan Gonzalez: Yeah, and you all, of course, are bringing a ton of your own experience to this conversation. That is exactly the right insight. I think it was two years after we started. We piloted our first semester long course. We got 16 students from four different schools in the Raleigh, Durham area of North Carolina, and we essentially taught a course for those 16 students. They did three cycles over a semester, three Teamship cycles. And we were, I think we were taken aback at that the step wise improvement from cycle one to cycle two was kind of astounding. Like, once they get the first one under their belts, they can look back and reflect and say, that's what this is about. This is such a different experience for them, right? It's so different from traditional school. And so once they have one under their belts, they're able to, just like adapt very quickly, set new goals for themselves for the second cycle, and the level of their work just improves pretty dramatically. And so I think we realized in that moment, the most ideal implementation mode is one where students get multiple touches on the ball for exactly the reasons that you mentioned.  Julian Alssid: Okay, so, so staying on the path of specifics, this is great. It's really, really fascinating. And so much of what we try to do is unpack and understand, like, the school side I get, how about the employers? I mean, you know you mentioned earlier, like, yeah, sure. You know, most people are getting it's mostly word of mouth. For most people, that's how they found an internship. How are you engaging employers at scale? How do you find and support them?  Dan Gonzalez: So we have a team of people that is dedicated just to this work of engaging employers. To date, we've had, I think we're at about 700 employers who have engaged in this work. Some of them engage once. Some of them engage twice, three times. I think we've had some engage as many as nine or 10 times. The number one key is creating an opportunity for employers that is low lift, high impact. So we want to make it as easy as possible for them to say yes, and before they understand the details of the experience and what their role would be. They often come in with the assumption that their role is going to be kind of like it would be for a traditional internship, which is, all right, I'm going to have to manage a group of students over multiple weeks and multiple hours per week, right? And a lot of times, companies are hesitant to do traditional internships or offer traditional internships for high school students. Number one, because there's a whole bunch of like legal considerations when you're working with minors. Number two, they're often skeptical of high school students' ability to add real value to their businesses, right? So what we try to do is counter both of those potential skepticisms, right? So the first thing we say is, look, this is going to be a five hour experience for you over the course of four to five weeks, the first hour or so is going to be working with us to scope the problem. We're going to actually write the problem statement. We're just going to kind of interview you business partner to understand what's keeping you up at night, and then we're going to craft a business problem statement that will be accessible to high school students. And then the rest of those five hours, you're going to meet with the student teams three times, and the first time, students are going to come in and they're going to interview you, they're going to run the meeting. So all you have to do is show up and represent your business and your problem. The second time is a midpoint check in. They're going to come with some initial ideas, maybe ask you a few more questions, and then the third time, they're going to propose their solutions to you in kind of a boardroom style meeting. And so for the business partner, the reaction typically is, so I don't really have to, I don't have to mentor the students full time during this experience, and the answer to that is no, the teacher who's been trained will do that part. And so it's an easy ask that they can say yes to, given that the students are owning those three meetings and facilitating those three meetings, it's easy for the business partner to plug in. And so the first time, we make it easy for them, and they generally want to participate because they want to do good in their community. And then I think they realize that we have evidence to suggest, they realize the power of the opportunity and how much value and benefit they get out of it, and so that's when they're out for a second and third time. So that's kind of the strategy that we try to employ, that we've kind of refined over the years.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So Dan, it's really interesting to hear you talk about, as Julian said, both the employer side of this and the school side, as you reflect on, I mean, you said this was you started in 2017 so you've been building this for the better part of eight years at this point. I mean, tell us about your growth trajectory. What are some of the challenges and opportunities you've encountered as you've built District C, because I would imagine that, you know, you've addressed a lot of challenges that maybe others are, you know, wrestling with day to day, and how to make this type of really authentic work, and these types of authentic projects happen in schools and communities.  Dan Gonzalez: Yeah, yeah. Thanks for that question. When my wife and I started this, we were both first time entrepreneurs, and so we were simultaneously wrestling with like, okay, what's what's like, the education part of this, and then what's the entrepreneurship part of this? Like, we're two new entrepreneurs trying to start something that matters and trying to make an impact. And so I think, like, one of the big challenges for me, just like a personal challenge for me early on, is I went from a job where I would wake up every morning and I'd have eight hours of meetings blocked on my calendar, and it was just back to back to back, right? And then starting District C, I'd wake up in the morning and there'd be nothing on the calendar. All proactive, right? It was all like, go out and make it happen. And that was a really difficult transition point for me. And I think one, I had a lot of impatience early on, and like wanting to see results and outcomes. And I think one learning and reflection is this kind of stuff, like when you're building something new from scratch, it takes, it just takes time. You all know this, I see the head nodding. You know this experience, it takes a lot of time to build traction. I think one of the things that, in retrospect, a good decision we made early on was we didn't, we didn't hold ourselves to getting it exactly right the first time. Instead, we took kind of a test and learn mindset, and so the first thing we did is we got 10 or 11 students around, around the community, and we just tried the first version of the program that we had dreamed up. And we learned so much from that, that first pilot, from that first trial, and we just kept building on it. And honestly, we didn't worry about the business model, we didn't worry about the scale model until we felt like we had enough reps on kind of coaching students through Teamship, where we felt like, oh yeah, this is, this is what we want to kind of put out to market. And so I would say the first phase was proving demand. Do students want to do this? Will business partners engage? And once we felt like we had a check mark in that box, then we thought about the business model. So as a nonprofit, how are we going to fund this? And what we decided was we're going to do it in a fee for service approach, so we're going to partner with school districts and they're going to pay us to deliver this service. And that is ultimately going to be the thing that will indicate for us whether this is working or not, is our districts, will they? Will they pay us for this? And so that was, that was kind of the second phase, was building the business model. And then the third phase, which we're in now, is scale. So how do we prove that we can scale this nationally with high fidelity and continue to kind of see the results that we're seeing? So yeah, those are, those are the phases we went through.  Julian Alssid: So as you're now in this scaling phase, how are you continuing to monitor your success and you kind of, you know, what sort of data you collect. How are you using that for scale and continuous improvement?  Dan Gonzalez: I would say the primary answer is, we try to stay really close to the work, observing students doing the work, you know, staying in close contact with teachers and coaches who are coaching students so that we're getting constant feedback from them on what's working and what they're struggling with. We also do some formal surveying of students and teachers and business partners to get a sense for like, hey, you know, at the most basic level, would you recommend this experience to someone else? And so we monitor that kind of data. We asked students to self report on their growth along two dimensions, one, their confidence in working in teams and their confidence with solving complex problems. So there's some self report data there. So I think piece number one is trying to, just like stay close to the end stakeholders and users and understand what their experience is. The second thing, as I mentioned a couple of minutes ago, is, is like through market signals? So when we're having conversations with prospective district partners, are they, are we, is this concept resonating with them, and is it resonating to the point where they're willing to spend some of their budget to put this in front of students? Right? And so I think that has been an important, just like market indicator of how valuable this, what is the perceived value of this kind of work in the market? The thing that I think we need to get our ducks in a row on is, how do we measure the long term impact on this? And so I think the dream state for us would be, you know, understanding from our student base, from our alumni at age 25 or 30, say, versus students who have not done Teamship, what is what is your level of well being? What are your employment outcomes? What is your annual salary? And comparing that against students who haven't been through the experience just to see, like, are we getting kind of the scalable impact that we want? And that, of course, as you can imagine, just takes a ton of work to think about how to design that, that system that would give us that kind of input.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So you mentioned, Dan, you know, kind of monitoring, like staying close to the work. It makes me wonder too. As you've talked about the growth of this program over time, where are, where are the programs located at this point? In which states do you operate?    Dan Gonzalez: Yeah, we've had students participate from. I think it's 16 states at this point. And that's a little misleading, because in some states that might be one or two students who opted into a virtual program that had students from multiple states.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Oh, neat. Yeah. Dan Gonzalez: The vast majority of our work is in North Carolina. It's where we live and where we got started. But increasingly, we have programs running in Virginia, Wisconsin, a new, new partner in Texas. And so, you know, honestly, to this point, we haven't really had a state, state strategy as much as we've just like followed the energy. So where we get interest will partner, and where we have the right mission alignment with partners, that's where we invest our time. And so it's kind of just by happenstance where, kind of these pockets of activities are happening?  Julian Alssid: Do the relationships with the districts look similar around the country? Is there? Is there? Is this evolving? Is this building out? Yeah, I would say, generally speaking, they do. So usually the first conversation is with the Career and Technical Education Director at the district level, and the implementations tend to be in CTE courses, oftentimes in entrepreneurship or business principles or marketing courses, what have you. And so we're definitely seeing some patterns in terms of how CTE directors are valuing this work, where they're trying to plug it in, why it matters to them, but certainly on the edges, you see variations and kind of custom implementations depending on specific geographies and program needs. And I would say most of the time a school district is wanting us to help them engage businesses in their backyards. Sometimes they want to expose their students to businesses that exist in other parts of the country, but usually they're trying to create a community around this work in their region. And they're often bringing really deep relationships with business partners that they want to deepen even further. And they see teamship as a way to engage them on a different level.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So with your response to that question, I feel like we're kind of naturally going in this direction, but we always like to tie the podcast conversation a bit to the title of the podcast, which is  Work Forces. So thinking about everything we've talked about today, and I think you've given us a lot to think about here, Dan, but what practical steps can our audience take to become forces in supporting secondary school learners to obtain applied learning experiences.  Dan Gonzalez: I think teamship is a great way to connect the education community, the educator with the business community. And so I would say, if you are running a program for young people, whether it's a workforce development program, program that exists in a community college, or a higher ed setting, or in a K 12 setting, a Teamship is a great way to get students involved with businesses in the community. If you are a professional that works for a business and you're interested in doing what you can to help young people prepare for their futures. Obviously, we're always looking for business partners to engage in this work, and would love to have a conversation. I think, though generally, just beyond Teamship as we're thinking about preparing, preparing people for their futures, I think kind of embracing a shift from hey to prepare for a job or a career in your future, you need to develop skills around this very specific type of job or career, right? And it's, it's generally skill based, you know, relative to a career pathway or a career sector, whatever it might be. And I think that's really important, especially as jobs are changing and the types of jobs that are emerging these days we hadn't even imagined 10 years ago. So certainly, there are skills and competencies that young people need, but I think we need just as much weight on the transferable skills that students can take across any career path or any career journey that they might embark on. We talk a lot about the importance of durable skills, but I think we need to get really serious about how we help students develop those. And I think there's employers have a responsibility to help educators think about that and to engage in that kind of work.  Julian Alssid: Yeah. I mean, I think, and especially with fluidity in the job market, and it's more and more about, you know, what are the bucket of skills you've accumulated, and how can you now apply them in new realms and new places, both to figure out what you like and where you want to go and where's the fit, but also because everything is in flux. So I think you know this, this idea of having a series of experiences where you're building these skills, and there's a lot of overlap, and the durability develops in that build.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, and I do think too, I mean, for high school learners, I think often, course work is subdivided right into these, into particular subject areas. And it's like actually, though, in most settings, we're not working in a one subject area, right? We're working in a cross-disciplinary way, and to make that more transparent for people and to like have these types of team based experiences, project based experiences that integrate those skills, I think, helps to proactively and intentionally share exactly what you're saying, Dan, right? That like we don't like as much as you, of course, need to focus on building out specific knowledge and skill domains. There's a lot of integration, and it's actually in the integration of those skills where a lot of the magic happens. Dan Gonzalez: Yeah, well said. Julian Alssid: Yes, indeed. Well So Dan, as we wind now, in our conversation, this has been really fascinating, so you know again. So appreciate your time, and wonderful to hear how you, your just your own process, your own thought process here and how this has all unfolded. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work?  Dan Gonzalez: Yeah, so district c dot co is our website. We have a page on there called the latest where we have updates, and there's a contact form there, and so that's how most people will find us and reach out. And you can find me on LinkedIn as well. I'd love to, love to hear from you. Would love to continue this conversation. And yeah, that's a spot you can get in touch with me directly.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. Well, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today, Dan, it was thanks so much for having me. Kaitlin and Julian. I really appreciate it. Thanks for doing this work. It's important.  Julian Alssid: Yes, thank you, Dan.  Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation, and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info forward slash podcast. You can also find workforces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends, and if you're interested in learning more about workforces consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.  

Rick Laferriere, Lead Director of Workforce Initiatives at CVS Health, discusses his team's 25-year commitment to building what he calls "non-traditional talent pipelines" by partnering with workforce systems, educators, and community organizations to reach individuals who face barriers to employment. Drawing from his own journey starting as a CVScashier in high school and spending over 30 years with the company, Laferriere shares the philosophy behind creating relationships rather than transactions with community partners. He explores the complexities of operating across all 50 states where workforce systems, funding priorities, and political landscapes differ dramatically, emphasizing why customization matters more than one-size-fits-all approaches. The conversation delves into practical strategies for employers looking to engage in workforce development, including the importance of sharing curriculum and training rather than keeping it proprietary, offering work-based learning experiences before hiring, and dedicating resources to build genuine partnerships. Laferriere also addresses the challenge of measuring success in work that carries both quantitative and qualitative value, explaining why his team takes pride in the fact that only 30% of program participants come to work for CVS while the other 70% strengthen the broader community workforce. He calls on employers to get curious, join workforce boards, and find champions within their organizations who can balance passion for community impact with demonstrating business value. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort, please check out our workforce's podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in.  Julian Alssid: Welcome back. For a long time, the education and workforce system was tasked with preparing people for jobs, with employers often playing a more passive role. But that dynamic has shifted, with employers increasingly leading the way on workforce development.  Kaitlin LeMoine: It's true, Julian employers have stepped into that gap, not just to solve their own talent gaps through internal training and upskilling initiatives, but also through broader partnership initiatives designed to expand the overall talent pipeline, to reach and educate those who may otherwise not know about those career opportunities, or those who previously faced barriers to employment or educational attainment?  Julian Alssid: Yes, absolutely Kaitlin. And as more companies are seeking to innovate in this space, it's helpful to look at models that are established and continuing to respond to the evolving needs of their industries and the labor market. Our guest today is Rick LaFerriere, Lead Director of Workforce Initiatives at CVS Health. Rick leads CVS award winning programs that are designed to create opportunities for people facing barriers to employment, partnering with education, community organizations and government agencies to build bridges to meaningful careers. Rick serves as the advisor to CVS Health Abilities in Abundance programming, and has oversight of CVS, highly regarded Workforce Innovation and Talent Center concept. He also contributes his time and expertise in the workforce space to several advisory and workforce boards locally and nationally. Rick, welcome to Work Forces.  Rick Laferriere: Thanks, Julian, Kaitlin, nice to see you both and glad to join you today here. This is great.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, thanks so much for being with us today, Rick.  It's great to see you as well, and looking forward to jumping into this conversation today. So as we get started, could you please tell us a bit more about your background, your trajectory, and what led you to your current role at CVS Health?  Rick Laferriere: I've been with CVS Health for over 30 years. I actually started in a local CVS Pharmacy store when I was in high school as a cashier. And so my career here started at entry level in our stores, doing customer service. And at the time for me it was, it was a job to make money, to save money to go to college. And interestingly enough, it turned out to be a lot more than that. I ended up staying with CVS throughout my time at college. I went to school at Boston College and ended up working at CVS all throughout my college career, and when I graduated from college, realizing I had five years with CVS and an opportunity to continue in the management program, I jumped at it. It was an easy transition for me from college into the workforce and to the full time workforce. And so I ended up working on our retail side of the business for about eight or nine years as a store manager in the management program, being at ground level, really working with customers and patients in our stores. And then one day, at the end of 2007 I got a tap on my shoulder asking me if I wanted to run our brand new Regional Learning Center in Boston, which was this new concept of having a training facility, co located inside of a community partner, and in this case, it's Jewish Vocational Services in Boston, where we could work together with JVS and other community organizations and government agencies and the educational community to provide individuals from the communities we serve with the opportunity to engage in workforce and education. And at the time, I'll be honest, I didn't know much about it. I didn't know much about this team. I didn't know much about the workforce or the education space. I had had all my time at retail, but it was an opportunity I couldn't pass up. So not knowing a lot about it, I said, sure, let's go for it. Let's do this. And so at the beginning of 2008 I joined the Workforce Initiatives team. Still here today, 17 plus years later, and it's pretty amazing to me to think about this journey, because I never expected to be here. I never expected that this, this was going to be my career. I never expected that I would be so invested in workforce and education and supporting people with barriers to employment. But I quickly realized after I joined the team that this was this was my calling. This is where I wanted to be. I wanted to be in this space. I had the passion, the creativity, the interest of doing it. So hopefully, my career has grown since I've been with the team. This is my fourth different position on the team. I'm now co leading the team, along with two of my colleagues. We have a team of about 40 across the country. And so when I think about the work that our team does, and I think about my own pathway here, they're very similar. We want people to engage in careers with us, because you never know where you'll end up. And I did not know that I would end up here, but I certainly am glad I did.  Julian Alssid: You're the embodiment of walking the walk, I guess, or talking the talk, or whatever that term is, even though it's really, really cool. So today, then Rick, your current role, you know, what are the main workforce challenges that you're looking to solve in this role? And some of the key initiatives?  Rick Laferriere: Our workforce initiative team has actually been around for 25 years, and at the core of what our team does, it's building what we call non traditional talent pipelines. Think of a traditional talent pipeline is what your talent acquisition team is doing the standard sort of recruiting approach. Our team takes a non-traditional approach, which is working with the workforce system and with education, looking at individuals who tend to be overlooked, who tend to face barriers to employment, and working with the community, working with government to build programming that helps folks attain the skills they need to come to work for us. And folks know CVS Health, mainly because of CVS Pharmacy, which are our retail stores. And of course, we've got, you know, we've got thousands of stores across the country. Retail tends to be a very high volume, high turnover type of industry. And so, you know, part of the strategy for our team and our company is, how do we find people who we've never engaged with, and have not been in the workforce, or have never considered retail for a variety of reasons, and get them interested in coming to retail. And so for us, you know, there's a bit of an existential need for talent. You know, we're constantly looking for folks for our stores, for the front part of our stores, for the pharmacy part of our stores. And you know when, when you've been doing this for as long as we've been doing it, you discover that the community has, in some way, shape or form, engaged with us at some time, but they may not know enough about our careers and our opportunities. And so there's, there's a portion of that, which is just engaging the community about what it's like to work here. But at the same time, the other part of this is being a solution to filling skills gaps and to providing people with opportunity to enter the workforce. And so for us, we are constantly hiring. We're constantly growing. You know, healthcare, even retail pharmacy is still growing. So we always need talent. And if you, if you're doing it the same way with your talent acquisition folks, or you're doing it, you know in a traditional way that others are doing it, you're gonna you're gonna run out of you're gonna run out of talent to find at some point. And so our team's job is to find new talent and find folks who have not been engaged or don't feel like they fit into the workforce or have a barrier, and so that our team is is in the community, doing that, digging deep to find folks who want to come and work for us, opening the doors to opportunity, showing them what it's like to work at CVS, and then putting someone like me in front of them, saying, I started at entry level in this company, and now Here I am. I never thought I'd be here, but here I am in a leadership role, you know, 30 plus years later, and so we really try to frame it up to the community that we want to work with them. We want to provide you with skills and training and opportunity to come and work for us and grow and eventually thrive.  Kaitlin LeMoine: It strikes me as you painted the picture of how you have that conversation with an individual around like here are the opportunities available through CVS that there really is this, this customized approach to working with individual learners, but even I would imagine the community organizations themselves. I'm curious, building on that, what are some of the challenges and opportunities that you've come across as you address workforce needs, recognizing that I would imagine each area is different, and that you work across many states and regions.  Rick Laferriere: Yeah, each area, region, state, is completely different, and that is the biggest challenge our team faces. Which is finding out how we best fit into workforce. You think about how workforce is set up broadly, you know, in the flow of federal or state dollars into workforce, programming and education, every state has a different priority. Every state is focused on different industries, has different populations, has different political goals as well, and all of those pieces factor into what workforce looks like. And so as a company that has a presence in all 50 states, we need to figure out how we best fit into those landscapes in each of the 50 states. What we do here in Massachusetts, which is home for me in terms of workforce, is entirely different than what it looks like in Texas, than in Florida, than in some western states. But the Northeast tends to be a bit more similar in terms of workforce and how states support workforce and the industries here. But if you're not familiar with sort of what that looks like as an employer. You're going to struggle to find your place in that workforce system. And if you come at it with a one size fits all approach, or you come at it with, you know, say, a team or an individual as an employer that is walking in with with no knowledge and no understanding of how workforce and education works in a particular region or state, you're not going to succeed. You're going to need folks who can dig deeper and understand the landscape and understand how all of that works, and also express what you're looking for as an employer. So you know, for us, it's it's challenging to understand all of those different spaces, but our team was built and designed to do just that, to understand how workforce operates. And of course, we have to do that as a big national corporation. If you're a more regional or local employer, you're able to dig in deeper where you are. And so, you know, there's certainly a little less complication for the smaller employer dealing in a smaller area, but as a big national employer, you've got to figure out everybody's systems. And so we've deployed a team that does just that, that learns and understands what what each workforce system is doing, how they're funded, how they're funding vendors or providers, what the adult ed landscape looks like, what the community college landscape looks like, the education, all of those pieces are important factors into what we do to build programming that likely is very customized, not just to us as an employer, but customized to the population, the funding, or the community partner or the provider that's doing it and really building something that works locally. Because what we found is that if we build a book and we just hand that book out to everybody and we go, here's the book, it's not going to work. It isn't going to work for a certain population. It's not going to work for a certain region, all of those pieces. So for us, customization is critical and key, and thankfully, CVS has invested in a team like ours to figure that out. And so I think that, you know, we're really well positioned as a team to do that, because we get local, because we understand, you know what, what the priorities are in each state with the federal government as well, and that helps us do our jobs even better. Julian Alssid: Well, and I imagine that understanding what those priorities are within the state and in your industry even more broadly, also requires some gazing into the crystal ball, or at least making some bets about the future of the healthcare industry and and how employers can play a role in addressing anticipated needs. Can you speak to that a little bit? I mean, how do you do that? Are you doing that? And what are you seeing in your crystal ball?  Rick Laferriere: That's the really interesting part of our jobs. Our team has to be equally focused, both internally and externally. Internally in that we need to work with our internal leaders to understand what their needs are for talent and what is coming down the road. We're a healthcare company, so obviously, things are changing almost daily in the healthcare space, in terms of healthcare delivery, in terms of the types of care or the types of services we can provide the community, things such as vaccinations or primary care that are that are coming a little bit closer to outlets like ours. That's a whole new frontier for us as a company, we've traditionally been in the healthcare space, had pharmacists and pharmacy technicians and, to some degree, nurses, and now we're looking at expanding into the primary care space and more broadly, into nursing. And we are serving, you know, the Medicare population, with Medical Assistants and with doctors and so all of these things are fascinating. They make our jobs very, very interesting, and we have to have some understanding of how folks get into those roles, get licensed or get the skills they need to do those jobs. And obviously, for doctors and pharmacists, it's years of schooling for pharmacy technicians or for medical assistants or, to some degree, nurses, that doesn't require that amount of schooling or professional certification. And so we tend to kind of look in those areas there, and we'll talk to our internal folks and say, what are the positions you're looking for now, where are we going with this down the road? So we can, as a team, get in front of our community stakeholders such as education and community colleges and adult ed and say this is what's coming. So if you build training for this, it will be job driven training. It will be training that leads to a real job that is coming now, that's coming down the road, that's, that's now, that's that that will, that will sustain long into the future. And of course, in the healthcare space, like that's everybody's questions all day. How is artificial intelligence gonna impact all of this? And I'm not sure we know yet. Yeah, it's, it's, it's very interesting, but it's out there. And so these are the conversations we have to have internally, which is, tell us your talent needs, tell us where you're seeing gaps. I'll give you another quick example. Actually, internally, some of the conversations we're having with our retail leaders is around pharmacists. They see down the road a shortage of pharmacists coming because young students in high schools are not going into pharmacy schools at the rate they were going into pharmacy schools 10 years ago. And so they're already sounding the alarm and asking us and our team to get involved at the high school level exposing students to pharmacy that can be something as simple as having some classes or curriculum on pharmacy or pharmacy technician, or giving students a work based learning opportunity while they're in school, but those are some of the nuances of our work, where you wouldn't think we're recruiting pharmacists as a team from the workforce system, but we do have a place in ensuring that We're helping to cultivate talent in some way, shape or form. So all of these conversations happening internally, big challenge for our team now externally, we've got to take everything we just learned from our partners internally and go externally and go, This is what we see coming. This is what's happening, and largely the workforce, system, community providers, they'll have a sense for that, but when they hear it from the employer, that validates that thinking, it really validates the hey as a workforce system, broadly, we've got to go down this path. We've got it. We've got to get more focused on health care. You know, certainly here in New England and in Massachusetts, where I am, you know, healthcare is a big focus, because we have large, you know, regional healthcare systems that are constantly in need of talent. So largely community partners and educators know that here, but they may not know, hey, medical assisting is going to be huge in three years. Hey, you know, we're going to have a need for pharmacy technicians, because they're going to be operating, they're going to be operating closer to the, what we call the top of their license, which is, they may be doing immunizations, which is not something pharmacy techs have traditionally done, but a certain, you know, state board of pharmacy allows it. Yeah, we're going to do that. We want to notify our partners of that, because what we do as a team has a long tail. It takes time. It takes time to build programming. It takes time to ensure that it's right, and then to sustain that programming. So we're not always an instant solution for our own company, but rather, we're a sustainable solution that that takes a while to get going and can sustain long into the future, which is better for us, better for the community, to ensure that they have a place to come to get training that's that's ultimately going to be, that's going to tie to a job.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So it's really helpful to hear you talk about how you go about this work. You know, there's so many, so many I guess. You know, evolving factors at play. There are a lot of details to consider, changing policies, changing funding streams, changing industry needs, the labor market. And it was interesting to hear you talk about, okay, well, how do you deal with a particular labor market shift or the need for one specific role in one community? I'm curious to go a little bit deeper there, and would love to hear you describe, you know, what does it look like to partner with a community organization and an educational institution to address these needs. I mean, coming at it from an employer perspective, I'm just, I would love to hear a little bit more about, like, what is it, you know, what is the nitty gritty of, how do you go about these partnerships? And, yeah, and how to make this work? Rick Laferriere: Yeah. So Kaitlin, it's really for the employer standpoint, it's dedicating the time and the people to doing this. Largely, you know, over my years doing this, I've heard from a lot of community partners, a lot of government agencies, who've said to me, you know, that a competitor or someone else in this landscape came to them asking them to build a workforce solution. And they started with all the enthusiasm to do it. Showed up with a whole bunch of senior leaders at some meeting with you know, this community partner, and said, Hey, we want to do this. And they're like, sure, this sounds great. Let's do it. What happens after that is really, really critical, and largely, if you don't have enough resources dedicated to building a partnership that is more than transactional, but is relational. I like to say that, like you build a friendship. You know, almost because you're you're talking with these, these providers, these community partners, nonprofits, adult ed, education, whoever it is, they're very passionate about what they're doing, and if you're not, if you're not passionate, you don't have the time to do that, that's that's never going to be a fit. You're not going to figure anything out at that point. So, one of the pieces, I think that's really important, is that employers have to come to the table intentional and ready to provide resources and time and effort and energy into this . That's long past the transaction of sitting down and doing it. And so that's largely most employers don't have a team like ours or folks like ours who are dedicated, doing this work all day, every day. I don't have a generalist job. I don't have something different to do. I get to lean into workforce all day, every day, and the more employers who do that, the more they will see benefits for working in this space. So it really starts from the employer's perspective, with leaning in and being in and really staying in after that. You know, employers need to think about what tools they can provide in this conversation, to to a provider, to an educator, that they don't already have. And so, you know, a lot of times employers come to the table saying, you train them, and I'll take them, I've got the job, I'll do an interview, and I'll do all that sort of stuff, and that's nice, but there's more that can be done there. Employers can bring curriculum to the table. A lot of employers get very protective of their training. They, you know, it's proprietary. They don't want it to show up in the internet. They don't want to, you know, they don't want to show competitors what their training is. But you know, largely that's only hampering their efforts to train people, because if you're not willing to give your curriculum to to a trusted community partner so that they can train folks to come and work for you, give them exposure to to learning your careers, then, then you're already behind the eight ball. You're not, you're not, you're not providing that community partner with anything of value that could help them skill folks up for you and for your workforce. So for me, the number one piece is, come ready to share your training. Come ready to share something about your company, your culture, your application process, success stories, all of those pieces. It's not just as an employer, sit down and have the partner tell me what they can give to me. I need to come and say what I'm going to give to that partner too, and that's a big miss for employers. I'll show up with training curriculum, show up with the opportunity to provide work based learning experiences before the hire. We call them externships, or work based learning or unpaid internships, something that allows a student an immersion into what it's like to come to work for us, and those are tools that our team uses every single day to allow individuals the opportunity to experience what it's like to work at CVS. And that's great, because for some folks, they opt in and they're like, this is great. I do want to do this. I want to be a part of your company. And then for some it's like, this is not for me. Pharmacy is not for me. Healthcare is not for me. I'm gonna opt out, and that's a good both of those are good outcomes, because we we've helped someone identify what's right for them, and we've hopefully eliminated the possibility of turnover before it ever happens, which largely for our work, we want folks coming into our organization well prepared, understanding our culture, understanding what our jobs are like, so they can succeed and they can stay, and we provide a service to our internal partners of talent that's ready now and wants to stay. Those are a couple of tools in the tool belt. It's just so important for employers to understand the speed, the language, the environment of working in an education or workforce outfit, that it's hard. It doesn't operate the same way as a as big business does, and you've got to find a way to meet in the middle, and you've got to find a way to communicate talk the same language, and really develop that beyond relationship, but that friendship that will spur all kinds of new ideas and other growth that leads to creativity, customization, seeking additional funding that people say, hey, that's great. You're doing something awesome. I want to invest in that. We want to see more of that and also to have a benefit to the entire community and that industry. It's not just about us. This work isn't just about CVS Health. We love having people come work for us, but only 30% of people who come into one of our programs end up working for us. The other 70% don't, which means they likely go to work for someone else after the program that we've helped create, and that's fine with us. That's great. We actually do look at ourselves as a greater good function that's lifting up the community and workforce, and that's a source of pride for us. Julian Alssid: I'd like to hear a little bit more about your results. And you know, how do you measure your success? And perhaps, you know, punctuate that with an example or two that you're really proud of. Rick Laferriere: Yeah, this is, this is a really interesting conversation, Julian, and this has evolved a bit for us as a team in the last five years or so. So, you know, recognizing that we're working for one of the largest corporations in the country, and when you work for a, you know, publicly traded company, there's a lot of challenges that come with that you have to provide data for everything. Everything's got to have a return on investment. There's just a lot of hard and fast things that you need to show your value to the broader enterprise. That's a little tricky for what we do, because so much of what we do has more of a qualitative than a quantitative value associated with it. It's our team. You know, we've mentioned, we have 40 of us, and pretty much all of the 40 start with their heart and because we're working with communities, and we're working with individuals who look at us and go, I need you. I need the opportunity that you're offering and for various reasons, and that pulls right here for us and so, but in order for us to stay relevant and stay a part of this company, we've got to figure out measurements that show just exactly how impactful we are to the business. And so, you know, I mentioned the qualitative piece. We do success stories. We get so many wonderful thank yous from the community and from people who ultimately come working for us, or people who don't work for us. And those are great, and we'll share those all day with everybody, because it's such a big part of what we do, showing that we want to be a part of the greater good, and we really care. That's still an important part of what we do. But, but quantitatively, we've, we've begun honing on some metrics that at least have have given us a place to operate from with our leaders and and those metrics largely look like the number of participants in programs that we are we're actively partnered in and this year, we're on track to provide about 8000 people with experiences in a workforce program across the country. And that experience looks different everywhere, but that's the largest number of people we've provided a direct experience to in our team's history. So it's growing, which is great. And so we look at the number of participants that we put in programs. We look at the number of participants who completed those programs. We obviously want to see folks start and end a program, successfully complete it, and then, and then move on from there. And so we do look at the number of completers of our programs. We know people start, they stop for various reasons. We want to, want to measure that. We want to know why people opt out of a program. We want to make sure that we provide support, if it's you know, for a reason that you know may not be voluntary for that participant, but largely, you know, 95% of the folks who start a program with us complete it, which is great. That's, that's a, that's really great efficacy for us. So that's another measure I mentioned, that we, we measure the number of hires that come to work for us, and we, we, we aim at 30% we want 30% of those 8000 people to come and work for us, and largely, that's about where we sit, and we think that's a great value for us, because that's, that's, that's an entire group of people, roughly about, you know, 2000 people around there coming to work for us who may not have engaged with us before that, we've sort of introduced To the workforce, introduced a CVS that had an opportunity to grow and gain skills. And so we look at that conversion rate. We look at the number of hires that we have internally, although it's not necessarily a goal of ours, we do look at that. We're also looking at things such as the number of folks who come to us in a program that's not where. Where, where employment is not the intended outcome. So for example, you think about youth with disabilities. I'll give you an example there. Think about students who are transition youth, students who are towards the end of their school age, and 22ish or so who are still attending their their school system, but are about to age out. There's a large subset of students who need to figure out what's next once they age out of the school system. And we look at building programs for that population to immerse those students into the world of work through work experiences and work based learning or whatever it may be. And those students may not have employment as the immediate desired outcome, it may be down the road. We love working with programs like that, where we can be part of the steps towards employment for a particular population. And so now we're looking at measuring, hey, if we have a group of students that go through this, this programming we've built, and they weren't ready for work necessarily coming in, and that wasn't the intended goal of the program, but we're hoping that they're ready for work in a year, or even six months, or in some cases, two years, if we're a part of that journey, and then they come work for us in two years. That's an amazing story. And so now we're beginning to capture those individuals who come through our programs that don't have necessarily employment as an intended outcome, and seeing them come to work for us in two years after they've gotten all the experience and the confidence they need to work, and that's a tremendous success for us too. So we're looking at those data points as well. We're tracking the number of folks who come out of our career driven programs, the programs that are designed for hire, to be hired right now, and we're looking at the number of folks who go to work in the community for other employers as well. And we love that, that we think that's great, that you know, 60, 70% of the participants in one of our programs are going to work in another community setting. That's great, too. So those are some of the data points that we look at. It's not a perfect exact science. Nothing is in this space. We operate in the gray every day. So to get black and white is challenging, but those are some of the data points that we look at. Those are the data points that our senior leaders believe in, and believe in the value and what we do so well.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you so much for sharing where you're going with the data right now. And it I mean you're, you know, so thorough, and to be it's this. This work is incredibly nuanced and certainly requires, as you said, right that mix of quantitative and qualitative data collection. And I really appreciate how you shared. You shared how you go about doing network effectively. I guess as we start to wind down our conversation today, Rick, you've provided so many, I think, very practical steps and takeaways and examples. But is there anything else you'd like to share about how our audience can become forces in supporting workforce development, especially from the employer perspective. And you know, and also, would love to hear how our listeners can continue to follow your efforts. Rick Laferriere: For the employers out there who are interested in doing more here, who have not been terribly involved in workforce you know, I'd say this is an enormous opportunity to find talent at every level. And we've talked a bit about, you know, sort of the typical entry level points for our own organization, but there are entry points that are different in every every company out there, and not even that. It doesn't even have to be at entry level. It could be at a mid level position, you know, I would say to those employers as a call to action, come to the workforce space. Come to the workforce and education space, and learn what's happening around skilling members of your communities up towards careers with companies like you, and be a part of it. Be active. Get to know, you know that the larger workforce providers in your area, talk to them. Reach out, join a Workforce Board. Workforce boards are great places to network with other employers and with providers and also understand how workforce dollars flow and within the community you're in. From an employer perspective, it's just, it's get involved. Be curious. Build relationships, build alliances. Find people in your own organization who are champions in this space I mentioned earlier. It kind of takes a special person to do this work, particularly if you're in a big corporation. You've got a big heart, you want to help the community. You've got to balance it with I need to show my worth here. There's a way to do that. You can be very passionate and champion great causes for the community, while also showing those great results to your own senior leaders. You just have to be involved. You have to be passionate. These things are transactional. Make them relational. There's lots of touch points there. Your community college system. Your big adult ed providers. Go to, you know, go to your local one stop employment center and talk to the folks that are there. There's lots of ways to enter in and get curious and be there. So for employers get, you know, just get out there and see what workforce is all about. Because it's growing. It's building. It's a necessary part of all of our communities to ensure that the folks that are around us have the skills that they need to do the jobs that we're that we have today and now into the future. So certainly, for employers, I'd say, you know, get involved for the community and for those out there providing services, and for individuals interested in doing this we love doing this work. My team loves doing this work. We love being creative, and we love finding ways to support our communities and the individuals in our communities with workforce and educational programming, and it's really, you know, to some degree, it's, it's thinking creatively. You know, workforce can be creaky. It can be a little old. Workforce policies are a little old in spots. And, you know, a lot of folks kind of associate workforce with sort of like, you know, there's, there are layoffs, and there's, you know, you've got it, they're jumping in to help people who've been laid off. Or there's, you know, they used to, they used to help skill people up for, like, the factories and all of these sorts of things. And that's not workforce now, workforce is very, very different, thinking more progressively. And I really like that. And so for folks in the community, be be be ready to think creatively about how you can invite an employer into your your organization, or into your educational facility, and think creatively about how that you could, you know you could, you could leverage a really engaged employer into something you're doing to give people an opportunity. And so I think about it from those perspectives. You know, how can people learn more about our team? So interesting doing this work? I say a lot that we are a well kept secret, and that's not a good thing. And oftentimes we're a bit of our own enemy in this work, because we're very, very humble. We are not a look at me type of organization or group. We believe that we're doing good and that the spotlight should be on those who are benefiting from that, not our team, but those folks who are benefiting, who are becoming independent, supporting their families on the path to something like those are just those are, those are the things we think about. And so we're not self promoters. We don't do a good job with this, and our company doesn't do a great job helping us either with that. We're just too humble at times. But I tell people all the time, go open up your browser on your phone or on your computer and type in CVS Workforce Initiatives, lots of things will come up. A lot of the little stories that we have out there, you'll probably see little pieces about our workforce, innovation and talent centers. We call them WITCs. I mentioned I started in a Regional Learning Center in Boston. We renamed those regional learning centers as WITCs. So we've got more than 10 of those WITCs across the country now, and they are. They're really exciting. We do grand openings. A lot of wonderful things happen in those facilities, where we invite the community to work with us and enjoy them. You'll find everything out there with our community partners, you'll find a few things on our corporate website. There'll be some videos out there, some success stories. Um, that's the best way to figure out where to find us. And for those of you who ever want to connect with me or a member of my team for any reason, for any interest, do not hesitate to reach out to me anytime. I love hearing from people. I love talking with folks who are curious about our work. And so anytime please do reach out. I love hearing from folks.  Julian Alssid: Well, thank you so much, Rick for taking this time to speak with us today. You're the energy and thoughtfulness and nuance, as Kaitlin said, and dynamism of your work and enterprise is palpable, you know, through the whatever this is ether. And we hope that we will help bring your very humble work a little bit more to the fore through this, this podcast and and that folks will follow up, as you've suggested, and search for CBS workforce development, and we certainly look forward to continuing to track your work as it unfolds. But thanks again, so much.  Rick Laferriere: Well, thank you, Julian, thank you, Kaitlin, this has been a lot of fun. Thank you for the opportunity to join your podcast today and for getting to share a little bit about my team's work, and for your interest and your support and your partnership as well. It's been it's been wonderful, and look forward to many great successes in this space to come, indeed. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you so much, Rick. We hope you enjoyed today's conversation. Conversation and appreciate you tuning in to workforces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info forward slash podcast. You can also find workforces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends, and if you're interested in learning more about workforces consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.  

Van Ton-Quinlivan, CEO of Futuro Health, discusses her approach to addressing the shortage of critical allied health workers — the 65% of the healthcare workforce including medical assistants, phlebotomists, and technicians. Drawing from her experience leading California's Community College system and founding Futuro Health in 2020, Ton-Quinlivan explains how her organization has trained over 10,000 adults through a debt-free model that integrates 40 education partners with data-driven coaching and wraparound support. The conversation examines broader lessons about adult learner success, including why live coaching proved more valuable than debt-free education in scholar testimonials, how essential skills curriculum with digital badges builds confidence for adults re-entering education, and why scaling such a model required building an ecosystem rather than becoming an accredited institution. Ton-Quinlivan emphasizes that workforce development requires staying the course with aligned money, metrics, and data to embed innovation into organizational DNA. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our workforces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in.  Welcome back. You know Julian, our conversations on the podcast and in our consulting work are often about tackling workforce development challenges at scale. It's challenging just to design and implement effective workforce development initiatives, let alone scale them.  Julian Alssid: Absolutely Kaitlin, inevitably, these initiatives require collaboration and commitment from employers, educators, public sector leaders, community partners, and learners alike. Needless to say, this is a tall order to pull off in a single community or region, and exponentially more complex when we talk about working across regions.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And our guest today has a unique perspective on how to go about making this complex work happen with a career that spans the private, public and nonprofit sectors. She's gone from leading a massive higher education system to founding a nimble, innovative startup in 2020 that has since trained and supported over 10,000 adults across the US as they completed credentials and qualifications for Allied Health careers. Her work is a powerful example of how to effectively prepare untapped talent for career success.  Julian Alssid: Our guest is the legendary Van Ton-Quinlivan, chief executive officer of Futuro Health. I joke. I've known Van for many years, and she really has been a true standout in the field. And she's a nationally recognized leader in workforce development. She was formerly executive chancellor of the California Community Colleges and currently serves as an appointee to the California Health Workforce Education and Training Council. She's the author of Workforce RX and host of a podcast by the same name, promoting agile, multicultural solutions for employers, educators, and workers. Van has been named one of the top 50 women leaders in healthcare, and she holds an MBA and a master's in education policy from Stanford University. We are so excited to have you on the podcast, Van, and thanks so much for joining us.  Van Ton-Quinlivan: Oh, I'm so delighted to be here, Julian and Kaitlin, to be amongst leaders who are also thinking and trying to solve big problems in the area of education and workforce development.  Kaitlin LeMoine: We really appreciate you joining us for this conversation today, and look forward to kicking it off with hearing a little bit more about your background and what led you to your current work. Julian gave a bit of a bio there, but would love to hear more from you.  Van Ton-Quinlivan: You know my expertise in workforce development. I got my chops doing it in the private sector with a company of 20,000 men and women, where I brought them from having no opinion in workforce development to being an industry recognized national, national best practice. And then I went into the higher education system with the California Community College driving the workforce mission where, you know, I started in sort of the worst of days where we had about 100 million made available for career technical education program, and by the time that I serve, finished my two terms, it went from 100 million to 200 million, to 700 million to over a billion dollars. And so faced a big quandary when, when I was approached by Kaiser Permanente and its partners after stepping off from the community colleges, they said, geez, for two years, we've been wrestling with how to grow the next generation of allied health workers. And allied refers to the 65% of the healthcare workforce that we know we all need those volumes in our backyard. So you know, they're the emergency medical technicians that come when we have an accident, the medical assistant that checks you in, or the x-ray tech or the lab tech. So a lot of the technicians that are trained through credentials and less than a four year degree, they are the allied health workers. And right now you know, 75% of healthcare facilities report that they have workforce pains in this area. So when Kaiser Permanente and their partners approached me, I had to look in the mirror and really just reflect on the level of risk and how scary it is to go from running a billion dollar system to now going into a startup environment, and what if it didn't work. I think we all have these qualities when we make big career decisions. Fortunately, I had friends that reminded me of my early days, which was that, you know, I'm first generation who came from Vietnam through the war and education opportunity was made available to me, and I feel very grateful for that, and and I do feel the the role that I had with the community colleges was a pay it forward role where, and this role is also paying for the opportunity that I had to others. And so with that realization, I was able to overcome my own internal self doubt, and said, you know, really, for many of us who are on the innovation side, it's like, if it's not us, then then who? And so I'm glad to be bringing a lot of the best practices learned from the private sector, the public sector and into the nonprofit sector infant or health, to see which combinations of best practices can really get the untapped adult learners to be able to get their credentials and qualifications for that first or next healthcare career.  Julian Alssid: So looking at the untapped adult worker population and allied health careers, can you speak a little more to the problems that you're seeking to solve related to that population? And really, how does the Futuro Health model work. Van Ton-Quinlivan: Right now the labor market is having its adjustments with all the federal cuts. So I'm going to put that aside for the moment, because the macro, the macro context. The bigger problem is that we have an aging nation. And when you go over age 65 for example, all of us will consume more health care, which means that you're going to need more caregivers, right? And roughly, you know, 30, 40ish years ago, there were 12 working adults available for every one person over age of 65, Today it's roughly seven. And in about, you know, a little over a decade from now, it's going to be 4. So we have a shrinking adult population that is available to get in to compete for all the roles, much less the roles that are in care. So that is sort of the macro trend, and why we should be thinking about this space as well as other spaces. Now, when it comes to the individual adults themselves. You may be wondering, well, what's the problem for them? I mean, given this big need, well, we did four focus groups, including one that was in all Spanish, to learn what were the difficulties. And of course, you know, the first thing that came up was, of course, the theme of flexibility in the delivery, right? The second was, aside from cost, is the navigation, the navigation. So even if you knew you wanted to become a medical assistant, the path to go from here to there was not obvious. And so the noisiest of the options tended to be your private, proprietary option, which then led to the problem of three, which is even for those in the focus group who made it into healthcare careers at these entry level steps, they were so laden by debt, they were just stuck at the bottom rung. So we had considered all of that in the mix in order to create a path to getting credentials and qualification. Because you know, both of you know that healthcare is one industry that if you don't even have the qualifications, you can't even get the interview, right. It's highly credentialed compared to other industries. So that was sort of a good problem space to figure out how to apply the best practices of workforce development and see if we can design a way that could work for adults, or to be able to transition adults into the qualification and credentials they needed.  Kaitlin LeMoine: I'm just curious to learn a little bit more. It seems like you have a heavily networked approach in this work. How do you go about building out this model with your many partners?  Van Ton-Quinlivan: Workforce development is a team sport, not an individual sport. So it's like, how do you wrap the ecosystem into and fold the ecosystem in a way that, you know, everybody can do what they do best? So when we initially started, you know, many of the healthcare employers, of course, this sort of happened right at the beginning of the pandemic, their impression was, nobody wants to get into healthcare, right? People were not interested in healthcare, so we activated a set of partners and provided them tools that were heavily tied into the data science, our data science acumen to go out and scout and recruit, to take advantage of healthcare workers, to scout and recruit communities, friends and family networks. And it turned out that it was absolutely a myth that people were not interested in healthcare roles. They were interested, they just couldn't figure out how to navigate through. And so we even during the pandemic, when enrollment was declining, I know at the California Community Colleges, it was as severe as like, 20% decline in enrollment. Year upon year, we were able to hit all of our enrollment numbers to bring adults back in. So, you know, it's the gal who is the security guard in the hospital. She's one of our Scholars. So she became a Futuro Health Scholar after taking care of her mother, who had cancer, and coming to the realization that she potentially could be a caregiver and like to be in service of others. And then she found a Futuro Health flier, and we were able to get her phlebotomist credential. I know she moved from security guard into a role that was in caregiving. It's really how do you break into healthcare when you're sitting on the sidelines. Julian Alssid: Putting on your pre Futuro Health hat for a moment when you were dealing with the all the workforce development of the system, interested to hear what you're learning through the development and growth of Futuro Health that can be applied across industries. We were starting with some big numbers. So for example, in California alone, the need was for 500,000 more allied health workers. To begin looking at that, it's a design problem. We had the option with the capital we were given by the health system, we had the option of becoming an accredited institution ourselves. But we said, My goodness, how are we going to solve a 500,000 person problem by growing cohorts of 25, 25, 25, 25 right? I mean, it's a scaled dilemma. So we changed the way we looked at and I said, Well, how do we begin designing at 1000, 2000, 3000 and a time in order to begin tackling this dilemma? And so our approach Julian was, let's build the ecosystem of education partners, and now we have roughly 40 education partners whom we integrate into the student experience. And so our data science tells us, and our coaching tells us what is the best match in terms of which institution, which program, is mapped to the learner. The key, though, this is the key. The key is whether the education institution has the data exchange capability with us, because most of our partners, education partners, exchange data with us on a daily basis, right? So we know, we know where the scholar is, where we needed to intervene. And because we're shepherding their entire journey, and thanks to sponsorships from employers and state agencies, you know, they're coming out debt free as a result of going through this journey. So it's really important for us to not only provide the wraparound that is the live touch throughout their entire journey, but there's the technical education program, of course, vetted, curated based on industry demand. So we have 40 education providers. And everywhere we expand, we source, and vet and integrate new education providers. And then the last part, which is really interesting, is how we have leveraged an essential skills slash soft skill curriculum as the way to effectively onboard adults. And this is interesting itself. We had tried onboarding adults, because before we unlocked the full scholarship, which is fairly expensive to us, could they take two academic courses, like anatomy or physiology, for example. It turns out that that didn't actually predict their success so much as they're confident, building their confidence to re enter education. And so that's, that's one area we're super proud that we unlocked some some experimentation and it has worked.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So building on that last example, actually, Van, I'm curious taking a step back on this. I mean you're drawing from many years in this field, and many experiences across public, private sector, given what we're seeing, you know, with respect to economic shifts and technological shifts, and you know, thinking about how we best support learning for adults, what do you believe? Or what are you seeing in some of the best practices around how we support learning in this in the context of a skills based economy where there's just so much shift and change happening.  Van Ton-Quinlivan: I know you've had speakers talk about the skills based economy and the importance of credentials, and I'm just going to translate it to what we have experienced with our Futuro Health Scholars. And these are 1000s and 1000s of them, right? And what's so interesting is, even though they have gone through the Futuro Health experience debt free, they never talk about, oh, thank you, thank you so much for for you know, the that we came through debt free, they actually talk about those moments when they were going to stop, those moments they were going to quit, those moments that were really hard, and it was the live coaching that carried them through those moments of hardship. So when it comes to the question, for example, should AI replace coaching? We have so far decided that our population that we're working with, and it's 90% culturally diverse, with about roughly 50% linguistic diversity, very important for healthcare, because it begets trust. We have decided that the live coaching that is essential for the learners right now, so the AI, your applications of AI, improvement on the data can all be on the back end, but that is what the Scholars have valued way more than other things that we thought would be more important. The other thing Kaitlin that we saw was, you know, we have this unique curriculum called Human Touch Healthcare, which is focused. I mentioned that focus on the essential skills and soft skills, and they're all instructed by seasoned healthcare workers who can put it into context. And as they finish each of those modules, you know, they earn a badge, a digital badge, and the pride in which these adults take in being able to post these badges and have the acknowledgement it may be that the positive reinforcement is very critical to building the confidence of many adults who are sitting on the sidelines of learning right now. So I think in the broader context, as we think about the shrinking K 12, and where do we find and how do we tap into adults that maybe not participating or we need to upskill them, the success coaching, making the journey simpler, of course, figuring out the costs, but also, like, how do you, how do you continue to have the positive reinforcement throughout? I mean, these, these are not, these are not things that have been sufficiently designed into traditional education systems, but it helps us all. Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely right? Those interim milestones of success, right, that don't just come when you finish the course, but like those moments along the way that provide that continual what you're saying, positive reinforcement and the acknowledgement, like, yes, you have done this, keep going. Van Ton-Quinlivan: I can is really important. I mean, most of us waited until the earning of our degree in order to get that reinforcement, but right? I think when we're dealing with these, the non-traditional learners that are now becoming more standard, we just have to rethink how we structure their experience.  Julian Alssid: Well, and you're sort of leading right into what I was thinking, which is, as we watch this world unfold economically and demographically, and in terms of education, and what that means, and the choices folks are making about how to advance their education and careers, what do you see as the as the biggest challenges, both in healthcare and even beyond, for the, you know, for the people who are this band of partners that are coming together to try to, you know, advance, help people advance their careers and grow the economy.  Van Ton-Quinlivan: You know Julian, I wonder if you see that we're going to need to be more fluid with our education processes and systems because of how many different ways people are tapping into education, and yet we want them. We know that, Jeff Strohl over there, just issued a report called Falling Behind: How Skills Shortages Threaten Future Jobs, and he says that there's going to be a need to add additional 5.25 million workers with post secondary credentials, of which 4.5 million is a bachelors and above, and this is during the time period of 2024 to 2032. The bachelor's and above is getting very, very expensive these days, right? And then there's a lot of skepticism. So how we get people to partake in the education process and how to convert it over to the degree pathway, is super important. So you know, the prior learning credit, all the transcripting that your guests are talking about. The hard barriers between education and who provides it is likely going to soften over the future. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, and yeah, you said, it also makes me think about even, like, the technical systems behind how this happens, right? Like, how do we make sure that we have the back end software and ability to say, Okay? Like, how do we make this credential portable? How do we know that we know what it means here will mean the same thing somewhere else, right? I mean, there's just so much at play there around making, I guess, the translation of these credentials clearer, especially as people want to, you know, either stack credentials into a bachelor's degree or transfer credits into a bachelor's degree. So much work needed in that space. Van Ton-Quinlivan: Talking about scale, right, back when I was with the California Community College Chancellor's Office, is the question of, do you all your grantees? Are they all on Excel spreadsheets, right? And so what we did was we said, Okay, we're going to provide common systems and then for workforce outcomes, instead of having the grantees and the faculty and the administrators spend all all their time trying to hunt and pack and trying to find outcomes data. So we begin to automate some of those processes so that they're not talking about, where's the data they're talking about, ooh, what does the data say? So I think that will continue to be a long journey for us to evolve, especially big systems.  Julian Alssid: I'm wondering then, given your experience in and now, with working with many different systems and providers, are you seeing more of a flexibility? Is it beginning to happen? I mean, are systems adapting to more than they have in the past? I mean, this has been a story we've had, you know, discussed, we've all talked about again and again, and it's, it's hard for systems to change, but, you know, it's going to have to happen one way or another, is kind of what I hear. So the question is, is it? Is it happening?  Van Ton-Quinlivan: Oh, I think you probably have seen more examples of organ rejections than you've seen examples of organ ingestion, right? Maybe that's a bad analogy, but I think it brings up the question of, how do you introduce change, like, how do you have big systems try out and experiment things? And so I remember a day when digital badges. Do you remember the early days of digital badges, and everybody thought, you are just crazy to even think about what, what a concept. So I remember redoing a grant, existing funds, redoing a grant, and saying, Whoever wins this grant, you will be also experimenting with digital badges and this grant, the winner has to involve at least 10 colleges. And the reason why is that, when you design a solution for 10 colleges, it can't be just fine tuned for just your one college. It's thinking about scale. And so that was an example where it was originated in one grant with 10 colleges, and then the next grant was about getting it to 20 colleges, and then it went to about 60. By the time I left, it was like 80 something colleges had adopted the same trial and error, and it's now many, many moons later, it's sort of part of the DNA of a system and how students progress and how they see I think you've heard of the Career Mapper, and it's been integrated to multiple tiers of higher education, not just one. So I think as we think about all the different technologies, a big question in change management, it's how do we begin to seed some experimentation so that a system can become familiar, and then that adoption widens.  Kaitlin LeMoine: I think you were going in this direction very naturally in this conversation. But Bon we always like to add, given that the podcast is called Work Forces, we always like to ask about how our listeners can be forces. And so as we start to wind out our conversation today, what practical steps can our audience take to become forces in supporting learners and employers alike at this increasingly complex moment and intersection of work and learning?  Van Ton-Quinlivan: The biggest lesson I've learned throughout my various careers is that intentionality really matters. Right? It matters, because there are so many parties that need to come to the table in order to make a workforce program successful. There's intentionality such that any funding that you have doesn't manifest just as a one time thing. But there is sort of an echoing and ongoing learning that's incorporated back into the DNA of the organization. So, you know, I used to say that it's not just about money coming through, but it's monies, metrics, and data, they all have to be aligned for the behavior of our institutions to be where we want them to be, and that requires us to stay the course. So I know you have a big audience of higher education and workforce practitioners and leaders out there who are doing really important things. And so I just encourage folks, as they're introducing innovation, to stay the course. Because it does take time, and it does take staying the course in order for an innovation to have traction.  Julian Alssid: Very sage advice, and sounds like you know you're proving the very, the very notion. As we wind this down, we'd like to ask our guests: How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work?  Van Ton-Quinlivan: I would invite them to come to our website, which is futurohealth.org and subscribe to our newsletter. And you know, we were, last year, we were featured at the World Health Organization. I just came back from the G7 Canada, where we shared some of our best practices. And what are the implications for growing for example, the problem gambling, workforce, mental and mental and behavioral health. So there's a lot of good things that we're doing because we have the sort of the platform to be able to experiment, which could be harder in other environments. So welcome others to learn along with us, but also share ideas with us.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Great well. Thank you for sharing your ideas with us today and for allowing us to learn along with you in this conversation. And really appreciate you taking the time to meet with us today. It's a great pleasure.  Van Ton-Quinlivan: Kaitlin and Julian, thank you.  Julian Alssid: Thank you so much Van.  Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation, and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast, or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info, forward, slash podcast. You can also find workforces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcast. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends, and if you're interested in learning more about workforces consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward, slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.

Audrey Patenaude, CEO of RippleMatch, discusses the rapidly evolving landscape of early career recruiting in the age of AI and how the RippleMatch recruitment automation platform is transforming the hiring process for both employers and emerging talent. Drawing from her background scaling AI companies, Patenaude explores the challenging reality documented in recent research: fewer entry-level roles are available due to AI automation, while demand rises for "entry plus" candidates with verified AI fluency and strong power skills like critical thinking, adaptability, and communication. She explains how RippleMatch addresses the application overload problem—where candidates submit over 300 applications to land one role—by using skills-based matching to connect qualified candidates with employers, saving hiring teams 70% of resume review time while giving candidates a 20x better chance of getting interviews. The conversation delves into practical strategies for recent graduates to build portfolios of AI projects and document real-world experience, and for employers to create "AI centers of excellence" within their recruiting teams. Patenaude also discusses the shifting definition of entry-level work, the rising importance of interview readiness and communication skills, and why career preparation increasingly needs to begin in middle school to help students navigate this new paradigm where AI skills are becoming as fundamental as internet literacy. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in the higher education industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort, please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in. At the intersection of work and learning  right now, there's a confluence of challenges for employers and employees alike at all stages of the application and hiring process. In particular, we're seeing an increasing impact on early career professionals, as documented in the recent Burning Glass Institute report, "No Country for New Grads", and the "Stanford Digital Economy Lab paper, "Canaries in the Coal Mine: Six Facts About the Recent Employment Effects of Artificial Intelligence". There are fewer jobs available for early career graduates due to the impact of generative AI, which can accomplish many of the job activities previously done by early career professionals. Julian Alssid: Absolutely Kaitlin. And alongside this complexity, AI has also shifted how prospective employees look for and apply for new roles, and how companies go about recruiting and hiring talent. Just last season, we talked with Sean VanDerziel, President and CEO of the National Association of Colleges and Employers, about how employers are using AI for screening resumes, but also how the use of AI by job seekers to generate thousands of resumes is leading some employers to return to in-campus recruiting to find, you know, quote, legitimate candidates. Kaitlin LeMoine: And then there's also the impact of AI on the very tech platforms and tools that HR talent development and career services teams use to support their own recruitment and hiring efforts. Needless to say, we're facing a complex set of circumstances, and it seems like just the right moment to speak with someone working on this set of challenges every day. Julian Alssid: Which brings us to today's guest, Audrey Patenaude is the CEO of RippleMatch, a recruitment automation platform that seeks to transform how emerging talent connects with opportunity in the age of AI before joining RippleMatch, Audrey spent much of her career in the AI space and helped teams scale through rapid growth and innovation. At RippleMatch, she's focused on building a platform that levels the playing field for candidates while helping employers discover and hire the next generation of AI skilled leaders. Welcome to Work Forces. Audrey. Audrey Patenaude: Yes, thank you. Julian Kaitlin, thank you for having me today. Excited to be here. Kaitlin LeMoine: We're excited to have you with us, Audrey. So, as we kick off today, can you please tell us a bit more about your background and what led you to your role at RippleMatch? Audrey Patenaude: I'll start with a little bit about my journey and why I really connected to RippleMatch's vision. I'm originally from Quebec City, a very charming but very cold part of Canada. And over there, I studied business and marketing in college, but when I got out of school, there were not a lot of marketing jobs in Quebec City, especially this was before remote work, and there were not a lot of tech companies with offices over there. So after college, I had to work some marketing jobs for small local companies for a while, until this one job opened at an AI company that had offices both in Canada and the US. And I remember at the time, all my friends whom I graduated from college with were all fighting for this one exciting job that we had in our, you know, in our backyard, and I got lucky enough to get it, and I think that this gave me some perspective on how the right opportunity can really change the course of your life, if you're lucky enough to, you know, be at the right place, at The right time and get noticed. So years later, I moved to New York, and that AI company grew a lot, and we went through an IPO, and I got very lucky along the way to be supported by amazing leaders and mentors and learn in that fast growing environment with a lot of innovation, and then got the chance to move to the city that I love and now consider home. So when came time for my next chapter, I met with the team at RippleMatch, and I immediately saw how, you know, to me, this platform felt like a way to push some of that luck forward, to help other candidates like me land jobs that could change their lives and open up so many doors for them, so it's really a motivating mission for me to work on every day and get to see the real life impact of it for candidates in the world and employers alike. Julian Alssid: Audrey, speak to us a bit about what are the problems that RippleMatch is trying to solve for those employers and candidates and universities alike. Audrey Patenaude: You touched on it a little bit earlier. But RippleMatch is the marketplace for AI, skilled emerging talent. What that means, or where that talent is, is folks early in their career that know how to leverage AI across all types of roles, and that can be really these amazing contributors that make a huge difference inside companies, and part of the reason why is because Gen Z is leading the use of AI, especially bringing their own tools to school and and work. So the problem that we are solving for employers right now we're seeing employers starting to think very differently about hiring and team design with AI, they are thinking a lot about how to design their teams in a way that will leverage AI intelligence with human intelligence working alongside each other, and what is the best way to build a team that's going to be efficient with the best tools and skills set up, and that's across, you know, go to market teams and technical teams. And in that design of the new, you know, modern team across different function, entry level is no longer seen as a training ground where employers on board a lot of super junior green talent and give them very easy but laborious tasks as they learn the ropes of the job, because, as you mentioned before, now, tasks like data entry, data enrichment and cleaning, or very basic support tickets can be or are being automated by AI. So we're seeing that instead of junior specialists, employers are looking for AI enabled generalists, for example, years ago or recently, if you were going to hire a junior marketer, you would very often look for a profile of a junior professional with very deep expertise or specialization in one part of marketing. So for example, you're looking for a HubSpot expert. Now that profile is changing to looking for someone that has amazing power skills, so someone who's really resourceful, has critical thinking, is going to be very adaptable and very collaborative and with AI and being able to leverage AI tools that deep specialization in one tool is not as critical or as valuable anymore, because you can use AI to figure things out, to build workflows amongst multiple tools, and you're going to innovate much faster and be able to contribute a lot more than that previous profile of a very kind of niche set of expertise. So yeah, employers are looking for these candidates with AI skills who can contribute and innovate quickly, and at the same time, power skills are becoming even more important because AI is automating some of these hard skills. So the net here for employers, and where the challenge comes is that the bar for entry level talent is rising, but at the same time, inbound volume and noise is up more than ever with AI, as you were saying, allowing candidates to send out a lot of resumes or to use ChatGPT to produce a cover letter or resume. The challenge that we help with is helping employers find top talent that's ready for today's workforce by connecting them with candidates that have verified AI skills, power skills, and technical skills. So basically getting them straight to the right talent with the right assessed skills, so that they can spend more time reviewing and interviewing and qualifying these top candidates. Kaitlin LeMoine: So what does it look like to do that? Because, like you said, this is such a complex moment where employers are inundated with applications like, how does your platform work to help verify the skills that job seekers have? Audrey Patenaude: The way it works is that we replace that application overload and traditional resumes that you would get on a traditional job board with skills-based matching so employers enter the criteria that they're looking for in terms of not just background in education, but also the skills that they want for this role, in terms of AI skills and AI fluency, but also power skills and technical skills, and they get matched with candidates who have verified these skills through courses and assessments. So we know that they know how to use these tools, that they are good communicators, because they've taken these assessments that they can showcase on their profile, and they apply to the jobs that they are qualified for through our platform, which is really for them, a guided experience to find their path in this market and to build and showcase the skills that will get them hired. So it's a little bit like the dating app that you need to find the job in this AI-disrupted market that just cuts out all of the noise on both sides. Julian Alssid: Given that then, as we kind of move to this more skills focused marketplace, how, what are some of the successes, and then, what are some of the challenges that you're, you know, you're experiencing with both, again, both the employers and we're interested also in from the employee side as well. Audrey Patenaude: Obviously, it's a tough market for students. AI is automating entry level work, as you touched on, and I think there's generally a more conservative and cautious ethos around hiring in most industries. So it's a bit of an overwhelming job market for them, where the major that you studied in may not perfectly translate into the kind of jobs that will be available to them today and tomorrow, and with all that uncertainty, the reflex is obviously to send out as many job applications as possible, and our latest survey data shows that candidates were submitting over 300 applications on traditional job platforms in order to land one role. So that's obviously a lot of work and overwhelming for candidates, but also for employers. So what we're doing is really helping them build that skills and personality profile, when they can really showcase what they can do and who they are, instead of being one more resume in a sea of thousands and thousands.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And how about on the employer side? What are some of the successes and challenges you're seeing there, as you know, build out this platform? Audrey Patenaude: For employers, I think one of the challenges is on leveraging AI in their own internal workflow can sometimes be a bit of a challenge depending on the industry or the size of the company. You know, in our case, AI doesn't impact matching or decision making from employers on on candidates, so it's never an issue when teams actually look into but it's something where just the word AI can sometimes make some IT teams a little nervous, or it can make also recruiters or TA professional nervous in terms of how much is it going to change my work? Do I want it to change? And we really encourage recruiters to see AI as a co-pilot that helps them to do more of that busy work that can just be sped up and automated, but that they are in the driver's seat and they are making the decision it's just allowing them to spend more quality time with the best candidates. But in terms of successes, it's been really amazing to see how transformative this better way of connecting employers and candidates can be on both sides, because, as I was saying, our you know, matching connects only qualified matches on both sides together. We're able to save our employer partners around 70% of the time that we didn't normally spend on resume review, because there's none of the you know, unqualified noise coming in. It's only basically a pipeline of qualified candidates. So that's been pretty transformative, especially in today's market where ta teams are slimmer, there's less budget, there's less resources. So that time saving has been really, really huge, and for candidates, we're giving them a 20 times better chance of getting an interview than if they were to submit an application on traditional job boards, which is also really encouraging and much better for them. It's really great to hear from candidates who write to us after they got a job to thank us for how transformative this was for them in the job search, and how reassuring it was to finally hear back from companies instead of being ghosted. Julian Alssid: Well, it's, it's so interesting though, Audrey, because you're, you're sort of helping then to cut down on the noise and improve efficiency in this process. And but if what you said earlier rings true and is an ongoing pattern this, and we've been seeing this for years, although with AI now, the acceleration is just massive. Is the rising skill demand for entry level? And I'm almost wondering, like, is there going to be an entry level anymore? Like, what is, you know? Is there really, you know? So you're making this more efficient. You're helping employers, in a way, hire fewer people, but with much more precision. Is this a blip, or is this, you know, where? Where do you see this coming? A little prognosticating. Audrey Patenaude: To what I was saying earlier. I think that the profile of what it means to be entry level talent and the demand for it is going to change. We're calling this new type of entry level roles, entry plus, where you're not, you know, expected to come in, and, as I said, like, take a long time to ramp and contribute, because you have to learn very basic skills or do your junior work for a while. You're expected to come in, and, you know, be able to use AI to ramp up really fast, and to start innovating really fast, and to learn new tools really fast. So I think that we're looking at a profile where there may be a little less roles in some industries, but that these contributors make meaningful impact really quickly, and that with the folks that will be able to use AI the best, it's going to be pretty competitive for that talent. And we're already seeing some headlines about the salaries going up for this kind of young talent. That's really AI savvy. So I do think that there's going to be a revived demand for entry level with these right AI skills, and it's also going to be potentially pretty lucrative roles for these candidates too. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, yeah, it makes me wonder too. This is kind of transitioning a little bit to the higher ed side, but I'm just curious. Like, what do you see that meaning for, like, your higher ed partners right around like, what does this mean for we're talking about the skill needs going up. So what does it mean for career services professionals and those helping rising college graduates with this process of not only finding a job but also building that skill set that you're talking about to be entry plus. Audrey Patenaude: Of course, universities and career services are, you know, working as best as they can to get their students to be job ready and market ready. I think the challenge is that what it means today is evolving very, very fast. It had already been transforming after COVID with the rise of remote work, the way that candidates would connect with opportunity was already a little bit different. It was already getting harder. I think now it is accelerating and getting even harder, because that skill bar is rising and is also changing really quickly. So we see a lot of university partners coming to us to help bridge that gap in the job search, whether for an internship or for a first job out of school, to help alleviate some of the stress and how overwhelming the job search process can be, and the guide directing them to a place where they can receive matches that they are qualified for, which gives them a higher level of confidence when they apply to these roles, that they are a right fit for them, and that they will have a higher odd of getting an interview, but then also identifying the skills that they might want to build, learn, and showcase in order to increase their odds of landing a job. So for example, it may be good for me to take a class in prompt engineering online and be able to showcase to employers that I've taken that but it's also some things as simple as interview readiness. Interview readiness is a big challenge that we hear from a lot of our partners, even before you know the rise of AI and even before the bar got higher on the skills, on the technical skill side, just knowing which candidates is ready for an interview and will have the right communication skill to succeed and to succeed in your interview process was already a big challenge. So that's both kinds of learning journeys that we want to help provide candidates to build these skills and then showcase them, and then, you know, be able to translate that into recruiter sourcing. So yeah, we have universities coming to us and just basically wanting to get us in front of their students to help ease that job search process right after they graduate. Julian Alssid: Well, and we've had numerous discussions at this point about how this process is being pushed down to younger and younger and younger students. Just thinking back to last season, Jean Eddy from American Student Assistance, talked with us about middle school is where it really has to all begin. It's too late, if it's later than that, and I'm guess, I'm wondering is it, is it too early to say or from where you sit, are you seeing that this greater emphasis on building work experience, building those skills, building the interview and other communication skills earlier is paying dividends for candidates. Audrey Patenaude: We're seeing increased investments from our employer partners in earlier and earlier programs in terms of early ID and early kind of enablement and education. So it is starting to go earlier and earlier in that education journey, in part, to help build these skills that now employers have to build with candidates when they start their first job. In terms of what does it mean to be a good employee? What does it mean to show up on time and use email properly. All of these skills are being now a little bit put on the burden of the teams that onboard that early career talent. So with that investment of getting early ID programs earlier and internships earlier, it just helps front load some of that learning and also groom these candidates to be, you know, ready and bigger contributors when they joined the company a few years later. So we're seeing that investment come in earlier. Of course, it's not fixing the entire problem, and that's where I think some of that digital learning and proactively recommending what's the best class for you to take, depending on where you are in your career journey or the career path that you want to take is where it can be pretty powerful. Because I think what we're hearing from candidates right now is that it's pretty overwhelming to even know where to go or what to do to make yourself better already, because there is a lot of digital content. There are a lot of digital classes, and you can ask ChatGPT what to do. But what advice do you actually take, and where do you actually go to to, you know, get yourself ready for the workplace is pretty overwhelming, because they definitely feel it shifting. They know it's changing, and they want to make sure that they find their way through this new chaos. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, I'm sure it shifts a bit by industry too, right? Depending on where these job seekers are looking, like what occupations and industries are looking to work, then the upskilling needs pre employment might be slightly different, right? I mean, I would assume some jobs, based on what we've been reading, some of the jobs are, there are fewer of some jobs than others, I guess, as related to which are being more impacted by automation and AI. Audrey Patenaude: Yeah, definitely. I mean, we're seeing the headlines about having less computer science roles available. I think that in some industries or in some segments, they're less available. So coding is an example, but also, if you're an amazing coder, and you know how to use AI really well, instead of being, you know, 10x the impact of a normal coder, then you're going to be maybe, like, 50x or 100x so your value is also rising on the market. So I think it's interesting dynamics. I think where we're seeing, where we're seeing it change the most recently, or I guess the fastest, is also in the other kind of go to market functions, where AI was not really thought of as a big plus until really recently. If you're a business development person or a salesperson, I don't think you were considered as an AI talent up until just a few months ago. But now we're looking at partners wanting to make sure that the PR that they hire, or the marketer or the salesperson will have the right proficiency in the right tools, or will just be, you know, able to leverage LLMs to figure things out and be a lot more efficient at their at their jobs. So I don't think that the impact in terms of like number of roles is even across industries, to your point, but I think the impact on the profile that folks are looking for is starting to spread across all industries and job functions. Julian Alssid: That is so interesting, given all of that Audrey then, pulling on your own experience, what practical steps can our audience take to become forces in navigating or helping recent graduates navigate this complex job landscape? Audrey Patenaude: For recent graduates or young professionals, I would say, as much as you can build real world experience with AI, regardless of what your major was, or the type of path that you may want to pursue. Build a portfolio of these projects or these outcomes and document them. You can use ChatGPT to recommend tools or experiments that you can do, or different projects that you can build based on the type of career you're targeting, but really make sure that you're documenting those, building a portfolio of those, because more and more employers will want to see tangible examples of the type of AI work that you've done and how you were able to innovate and get creative with it. Because some skills like I can use ChatGPT will become, you know, commoditized and a no brainer. And it's almost like, yes, I can use the internet, right? Very, very fast. So how will you be able to differentiate your work and you know, and really show that you can bring more value? But I would also say, focus on developing your power skills. That's something we're hearing more and more from employers that with AI skills like communication, both verbal but also how you interact with recruiters by email are becoming more critical than ever. They're really looking for these strong players that will make an impact on their team long term, not just because of their AI skill, but because of their critical thinking and because of their collaboration skills and how much they'll be able to move, you know, across their function and across the company. And then for employers, I think the practical recommendation here is really creating those AI centers of excellence within their own teams, to really empower, you know, their recruiting team, their TA team, to innovate in the ways that they find and connect with the right talent. So we have, for example, take the biggest AI adopters on your recruiting team and have them be evangelists and showcase to others how they are embedding AI in their workflows to demystify some of it, but also inspire others to also dive in and use AI and when you're looking to adopt new AI tools, or to ask your CFO or your procurement team for new AI tools, really set expectations in terms of, what are you going to use this tool for? What are going to be the practical implications of it? And then what ROI do you think you're going to get from that in a realistic way, both for the impact on the recruitment team in terms of this is going to help save my team 70% of the time that we're spending on reviewing resume, that is that many amount of hours, and that's what we're going to be able to do better with these other these hours instead. Or what's the amount of money that we're going to be able to save, but not just tactically on the impacts on the recruiting team, but also frame it in terms of the impact on the business. That means, for example, we'll be able to hire talent that will convert to better talent or interns that will be able to convert into full time hires at a higher rate, because we'll have identified the best talent, folks that will get promoted and contribute more into the company. So also some of the qualitative aspects of the outcome that will resonate with business needs on top of, you know, recruiting KPIs. Kaitlin LeMoine: Great, well, so many practical steps to take away. Really appreciate that. And so as we wind down our conversation today, Audrey, How could our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work at RippleMatch? Audrey Patenaude: Yeah, we publish a lot of content on how recruiting is evolving in this market, and practical tips to adapt for both candidates and employers. We love to interview our own customer partners regularly to hear about their real life stories about how their teams are innovating and driving change internally in their hiring process. So you can follow RippleMatch on LinkedIn and myself to continue to get these insights on your feed regularly. Julian Alssid: Thank you so much, Audrey for taking the time to speak with us today, and we will certainly keep following you and look forward to watching this all unfold, you really are right in the center. Awesome. Thank you. Was a pleasure. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you so much for joining us. We hope you enjoyed today's conversation, and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit Workforces dot info, forward slash podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like, and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about  Work Forces consulting, please visit workforces dot info, forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.

Isaac Agbeshie-Noye, Program Director for Widening Pathways to Work at the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) Foundation, addresses the critical gap between employers' intent to adopt skills-first hiring practices and actual implementation. Drawing from his background in higher education and workforce development, Agbeshie-Noye discusses the newly launched Center for a Skills First Future, designed specifically to support small and medium-sized businesses that employ half of all Americans but often lack the resources of large corporations to navigate hiring transformation. He explores the striking disconnect where 90% of employers acknowledge the benefits of skills-first hiring, yet only 15% have actively implemented it, and explains how the Center's many resources—including a Skills Action Planner, resource library, skills-first credential, and vendor database—helps employers determine an achievable place to start rather than boiling the ocean. The conversation addresses frustrations from both job seekers navigating an AI-enhanced application landscape, and employers struggling to distinguish genuine skills from enhanced resumes, while emphasizing that skills-first approaches complement rather than replace traditional degrees by treating skills as the primary currency for understanding what all credentials represent. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So our conversations on the podcast and in our consulting practice recently, increasingly revolve around the movement to a skills first approach to educating, hiring and developing talent. Julian Alssid: Absolutely Kaitlin and and today we're turning our attention to the employer side of of that equation. And this is a critical conversation for all employers, but it's particularly critical for small and medium sized companies, where half of all Americans work. These smaller companies often lack the dedicated resources of large corporations to measure and track skills development, and it makes it challenging for them to adapt to new hiring models. Kaitlin LeMoine: That's right. And while skills are all the buzz, there can be a real gap between intent and action. According to the Society for Human Resource Management, or SHRM Foundation, 90% of employers acknowledge the benefits of skills-first hiring, but only 15% have actively implemented it. That's a striking gap, and many HR leaders and executives recognize its strategic value, but struggle to implement significant changes. Julian Alssid: Our guest today is uniquely positioned to address this challenge with a particular focus on helping small and medium sized employers unlock a wider range of qualified candidates by valuing a candidate's abilities and understanding how skills relate to traditional credentials. Kaitlin LeMoine: Isaac Agbeshie-Noye is Program Director for Widening Pathways to Work at the SHRM Foundation. Over the last decade, he's served in a variety of leadership roles across nonprofit organizations and higher education institutions, and focused on aligning strategy, culture, and operations to create lasting transformation. He's also been an instructor for undergraduate and doctoral student seminars, exploring his passion for easing student transitions through their educational experiences. Isaac earned his bachelor's degree in sociology from the University of Virginia, as well as masters and doctoral degrees in higher education administration from George Washington University. Isaac, welcome to this podcast. We're so excited to have you on Work Forces with us today. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Yes, thank you so much for having me. I'm excited to be here. Julian Alssid: Yes, and thank you for joining us, Isaac. We've talked a little bit about your background. Well, tell us a bit more and what led you to your role at the SHRM Foundation.  Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: I got here in part because I'm always very fascinated and very passionate about education and how people go about learning things that then activates them to do things. And so working in higher education, and encountering all of these college students that came in at 18, 19, 20, 21 years old with some understanding of the things that they thought that they were going to do for the rest of their lives, that was just really fascinating to me. And then seeing the evolution over time where their mind changed around that thing, that was also fascinating. I ended up getting into workforce development and talent cultivation, because I realized that it wasn't just enough to understand what they were learning when they were on the college campus, I was really intrigued by then what did they do? Like, where did they go? Where did they end up? How did they navigate their careers after they left that environment? And so that kind of helped me think more broadly, beyond getting people to degree attainment to getting them actually to career mobility and to ultimately, a productive citizenry, which is what, which is what the mission of higher education is actually designed to be. And so I got connected to the SHRM Foundation in part because I just have been really fascinated with, how do we get employers into the game even further to understand their role and to help them as they are trying to tap into this workforce that is filled with skills, but yet we're not matching people in ways that are quick, even though we can see some of the ways in which there might be alignment. And so this position is is actually structured to help try and address that, that gap. Kaitlin LeMoine: As we jump into this conversation, we'd love to learn a little bit more about the SHRM Foundation and your role in widening pathways to work.  Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: The SHRM Foundation is the 501(c)(3) nonprofit arm of the Society for Human Resource Management. And the Society for Human Resource Management is the largest network of HR professionals in the world. And so we have 340,000 members that are then deployed and activated into all types of businesses around the world. And so we believe that we can leverage HR and leverage those professionals to advance social good, which is how the foundation came to be. And so in the foundation, we focus on three bodies of work: strengthening the HR field, because we don't often think about who's going to come behind the current HR folks, and who is actually going to take on the new challenges related to HR, and how are we positioning those folks to be successful in that, and so we have a body of work that's focused there. We have a body of work that's focused on thriving together, and how are we creating cultures of care within employers and employer environments. And so how are we focusing on things like the social determinants of health, about or caregiving or workplace mental health, the types of things that make people feel seen and safe at work in order to continue to be there. And then the third part is my area, which is the widening pathways to work area which is focused on skills first, and the things that we do to help employers adopt skills first approaches. How do we test things, try things out so that we are reducing the risk as best we can for people to adopt initiatives that are going to help talent be seen better. And then the other part of that is untapped pools of talent. So who are we not seeing and how can we create opportunities to see them better and also to get them fully activated in this world of work. And so the SHRM Foundation does all of that, and our goal is to try and figure out where are, what's the messaging, what are the levers, where, who are the partners that we need to bring together to actually make this ecosystem work for job seekers and employers at the same time. Julian Alssid: Tell us a bit more about your area, Widening Pathways to Work. And in particular, we're really interested in hearing about the new Center for a Skills First Future. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: What's so exciting about that portfolio is that we're really trying to figure out what are the things that are getting in the way, and how can we start to solution around those things? And so we know that there are 7.3 million open jobs, and we are highly dissatisfied with that, because it's not because there's a shortage of talent. There's just a shortage of alignment. There isn't those connections and those systems that we're leveraging to make talent visible so that employers can make hiring decisions that make the most sense for them are, to some degree working, and in a lot of ways not working, and that is resulting in a lot of job seekers being incredibly frustrated, and employers also being dissatisfied with what they're getting. And in an age of AI, where we do have some functions that are being shifted based on technology, and we have job seekers leveraging AI to try and make themselves look more visible and competitive, we're in this environment where we have to be having this conversation about how we get these different sides to see each other. So that is what's exciting about the Widening Pathways work, because we are going to have to be considerate of all the things that are happening socially if we're going to make these pathways wider for everybody to walk through them. The Center for a Skills First Future we just launched that in June. We're really excited about that, because this is our try to help meet employers where they are, and that type of work is critical. You've mentioned before about our specific focus on small and mid sized businesses. This is intentional, because for large and enterprise businesses where you are well resourced to try a lot of things. And, you know, figuratively, throw a lot of spaghetti at the wall. You can try a lot of things to see what works. And then you can invest, or make investments based on what you think is working. And you have teams to support that you have, quite frankly, you have teams. To try a lot of different things. For our small and mid sized businesses, they don't, do not have that luxury as much. It's usually a team of one or a team of two that are driving all of the initiatives related to human capital in the organization. And so you can't, you know, it's hard to be thinking about managing benefits and also recruitment, and also employee grievances, and also onboarding and off boarding. And so what we were trying to do is to figure out, how can we put a series of tools at someone's fingertips and let them choose their own adventure? And so that's what the Center really tries to do. So we have four major components of it, where we are trying to take resources and make them most accessible. We have a Skills Action Planner, so any organization can go in and just knowing what's going on at the organization, you can take this assessment, which will give you a readout of your current state and where you are in terms of adoption of skills first practices, and also it maps out for you your desired state based on what you said that you would like to be. And we just then curate a list of resources to help you get from point A to point B. And so we try to remind people, this is this is the time to be ambitious, but we don't have to boil the ocean. So you get overwhelmed when you think about all of the skills first things that you could do. We try to normalize for folks, but it's okay to just do one thing. Just, let's just try that one thing and see how that goes. So whether it is removing degree credentials from a job description, or maybe it's leaning into behavior based hiring, whatever you choose that makes the most sense for where your organization is, we'll give you some tools to at least try and get that momentum going. We have a Skills First credential. It's a one of a kind credential. So for folks that are trying to learn more about what it means to navigate this space and how to navigate some of the barriers you may be running into in your organization, there's a space for you to learn and deepen your skill set so you can help bring others in your organization along, which is really exciting. We have a resource library where we are amassing all of the things scholarly and practically, that have been sourced around this movement, and having it all in one place so that you can search for it however you need to and get access to it. And then for folks that are further along than know this is what I want to do. I just need a vendor, or I need a partner to help me. We have a vendor database where people can go in and just access those professional services that they need to get something off the ground to move closer to implementation. And so we created this hub with the support of 14 coalition partners to really figure out, What do employers need, and how can we make those tools most accessible to them? We're acknowledging we are operating in this space because we have the connections to employers. We're not the only people operating in this space, and everybody has a different lane that they're working in some folks focus on talent. Some folks are focusing on employers. Some are focused on community based organizations. Some are focused on policy. But we all have to be in a conversation together about this, because the ripple effect impact all of us, and so it's great to also have brought together this coalition to be having these conversations together, and so we're excited about the center, and we're excited about how it can hopefully help accelerate adoption for as many people as possible, regardless of how your organization is structured or where you are on your skills first journey. Kaitlin LeMoine: So Isaac, given that you know, this was developed with a coalition of employers, really at the table to help inform. I'm curious to hear a little bit more. What are some of the most pressing challenges you're hearing from employers? Like, what's the perspective of, I know you said, you know, maybe just start with one thing, right? Like, maybe it's hard to take on this whole skills-first bucket of work. But I'm just curious to know, you know, what are some of the perspectives you're hearing from employers and from job seekers in this new, relatively new skills first environment that we're operating in? Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: I'll start with the job seekers. I think that the process is frustrating. This is a tough job market to be in right now, and I say that not only is someone working to widen some of those pathways, but also as somebody that had to navigate that job market. And so I'm three months into this role, and so I also was on the job seeking side, trying to figure out how I get my skills recognized and validated, and this is a hard environment to do that, particularly. When folks are also leveraging AI to make enhancements to their candidate materials, like your resume, your cover letter. And so we're finding that a lot of things because of that look the same. So it becomes really hard for employers to distinguish who has done what. And so that is a very frustrating experience for job seekers to be in, where you want to be actively participating in work, but because of the scale and the size of the job market right now, it's just really hard to stand out on the employer side. We hear a lot about there's a lot of intent, as you mentioned earlier. You know 90% of employers want to be leaning into these skills first approaches. Only 15% have actually done things that's because operationalizing a big idea is hard, and change is harder, especially when you have developed a tradition around certain types of practices that you feel like makes it easier. Like before, a degree was a signifier for you that somebody had some skill or proficiency that you wanted, and you could then filter people out by that. Now we're seeing degrees are not the only place that are telling those stories. Experiences tell us that, skills tell us that, competencies tell us that. And so how do we create an environment where employers can see all of that and then know what to do with it, because it's just so much, and in that environment, not all things operate the same or are created equal? Not all credentials are the same, not all degrees are created equal. So for a hiring manager that's just trying to understand, can this person do what I need? There are so many things to consider to try and get to that answer, and we're then finding people are going through that process of getting through that to that answer, and finding out that that you know, there's more upskilling that's needed, or there are additional supports that are needed in order for that employee to contribute and actively participate. So there's just so many things going on here for employers and for job seekers at the same time, and because there are very few mechanisms for those populations, those audiences, to be talking to each other, that's just harboring more frustration right with the process, because people are not really communicating, and also people are existing with all of these challenges that seem insurmountable to try to fix. So what we're trying to do, at least on the employer side, is make it more digestible, to make it step by step, for us to start thinking about, oh, well, have you considered this? Let's just try this first, and let's see what we're learning from this. Let's understand what success looks like when it comes to this. And one other thing that I'd like to add is, I do want to emphasize, we have chartered this Center for a Skills First Future, and sometimes there's some confusion around what Skills First actually means. And so we are trying to figure out that many different ways that people can be visible to employers and employers can recognize and validate certain skills, but we're not saying that this is a complete replacement for the bachelor's degree, and so we're not working in competition with degrees. We're trying to figure out and get clearer about the ways that degrees also convey a certain set of skills. And so we're trying to treat skills as the primary currency here for us to even understand what degrees tell us when they come across or when applications come in. And so that is one misconception that I'm hoping to clarify, is that we are not trying to campaign against degrees. We're not saying degrees are not valuable. They obviously have a lot of value, but the underlying thing around a degree, a degree is supposed to signify skills and abilities and competencies, and so we're trying to figure out, how do we get closer to that, so that whether you have a degree or not, you can still be seen and can actively participate in this job market and contribute to the workforce. Kaitlin LeMoine: Right. And so that everyone is communicating their skills regardless of what degree or credential has been attained. It's about this is the important thing for everyone. Yep. A lot of sense, yep. Julian Alssid: Right. And it brings us back to that interplay between work and learning and education. And again, it's complicated. We can't separate these all out artificially. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Yeah, they're all in relationship with each other. I will mention anything with talent is so it's challenging because success is always moving, like the metrics with success is always changing. And it's the long game. Like, you don't know when you sometimes you know when you hire someone, and you're like, I don't think so. Or maybe sometimes you might know, but for the most part, knowing that somebody can actually perform well, it takes time and but we are so inclined to want to know whether something works right away or not, and you can't do that with people all the time. It takes a while for you to know that, okay, this decision I made, using this approach worked, and I would, and I'm interested in doing it again. And so, so we're trying to remind people that this is a long game, and we can't usually see that the ship is turning while we're in it, but you can surely look back and say, Wow, look at where we were, and look at how our processes have changed, and who we've been able to get here and then retain over time. So we are on our way there in ways that will support employers and job seekers at the same time. It makes Julian Alssid: It makes a lot of sense Isaac, and it's interesting Kaitlin as Isaac, talking this through, it so resonates for me in terms of the work we do, which is workforce and talent development, is really complicated. And it was complicated before AI, it was complicated before skills first. And it's not getting any less complicated. And so a lot of what we end up focusing on is trying to get to start somewhere and to iterate and to get some success, and to try to build on the success. And if something doesn't work to adjust, and as you say, because each situation is so different, each, you know, down to the employee or the company or the industry. And I guess the question I have for you is, and I understand that the Center's early days. You know, it sounds like you've been giving this a lot of thought, obviously, and interested to hear about any early wins, you know, sort of specific early wins that you can speak to where companies have begun implementing skills based approaches to you pick, recruitment, hiring, training. Kaitlin LeMoine: Or even specific tools, right? Like, which tools are working really well, right? Because I feel like it is hard to know sometimes, like, what are the resources that are really going to stick and really help the most HR professionals? Yeah, right. I mean, given the number of members you have. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: I love this question, because there are just so many. There are just so many stories to tell. And this is, in part, what we are so excited about with the Skills Action Planner, is that it does give people also because they're reporting on their current state, they're telling us about wins that they've already achieved, that they may not even be recognizing as wins. And so if you're even at a place where you got to that Planner and you can say that I've had a skills first conversation with my team, that is a win. And so we're trying to at least celebrate those things and recognize those. But what we are featuring on our site is we have a host of employer examples. And so you can go into our library and click on employer examples, and we we have sourced over 100 different examples across different industries regarding practices that people have taken on, whether it's been focusing on apprenticeship, and using that as a gateway for people to enter the organization, learn about the role, and then to develop in the role, or we have organizations that have taken advantage of different ways of seeing and recognizing skills, so that they could then provide a curated list to employees regarding the types of skills they could develop in order to be competitive for a promotion or an advancement in their job. And so we've had examples around that. We've had organizations that have shared with us about ways that they're rethinking professional development or upskilling just based on what they feel like their future needs are. And so we've had organizations that have built succession plans built on the skills that employees who are leaving are leaving with so that they know then what to recruit for and how then they need to up staff themselves in order to perform those jobs in the future. So we have lots of examples there, so that people are leaning into those for inspiration. And it's not just you looking at a checklist and figuring out I need to do A, and then B, and then C. It's you trying to figure out, okay, this organization took this approach. They're working in construction, they're working in manufacturing, they're working in retail, and they have understood that this is a problem for them, and this is how they went about trying to fix it. That may not be the approach for me, but I could take some of the things that they've applied there to think through what could actually work for me and where I am. And so the employer examples, I'm going to always be yelling off of, I'm always going to be screaming about those, because more than scholarly articles and other things, they give you some idea about how somebody took theory and actually turned it into practice, but practice that worked for them. So I do encourage folks, we have quite a few on quite a few there, because we've had to design a product that hopefully was industry agnostic, even though people are always wanting to know people are always feeling like they are a snowflake, and in the world of work, like there's nobody else like them. And that is to some degree true, but a lot of the issues that we deal with are similar across a lot of organizations, and so just seeing some examples of how people have gone about it, and a lot of different examples hopefully helps to unlock people's minds and hearts to think differently about what it could be. And so I encourage folks to check out that library, just to see some of the examples that we have in there that we're really excited about. Kaitlin LeMoine: So building off of your last response here, I feel like what you just said about, you know, the industry agnostic tools and steps and strategies especially, but you could, you could provide industry specific examples as well. I'm curious, what practical steps do you recommend that our audience can take to become forces in developing skills, first practices? What are a couple of takeaways you can leave our audience with today? Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Yeah, so I will, I will respond to that in two ways. So thinking about audience as employer, understand where you are. So we have a we have that Skills Action Planner to just position people to just understand. Can you articulate what is going on at your organization right now? What are your needs currently, and what do you anticipate your needs being? And that is it's it makes the world of difference for you to know that it provides the greatest amount of clarity, because even HR leaders or other folks who are positioned hiring managers, because you can always level set with your leadership around here's where I think we are here's where I think that we're going. Is that right? And that is useful? And so I think that all employer partners, you're representing an organization, and you're listening, that is step one as an individual, because I also think that we all have individual agency here, step one is for me. And I told folks this at a conversation I had a couple of days ago. Do you understand what your skills are? Because how can we actually convince people that a skills first approach is it matters and is important, if you can't even articulate the ways in which and for me, the person, this is how I understand my skills are being activated in the role that I am currently in. And so if there is some opportunity for you to also do some understanding of what your skills are, what are you trying to develop? How is your organization positioned to help you develop those skills where there are opportunities, where you can try small things to advance your own skill development, and then recommend some of those things to others, like we have individual agency that we can certainly activate without getting the C suite level endorsement. And so I always encourage folks to think through, what does it look like in the environment that's most local for you, in the environment where you have control, and you certainly have control over your own professional development, and so if there's an area for you to lean in and just understand where you are, I think that that benefits and better informs whatever type of approach you're going to propose that other people jump on. I'll mention we have a here. We are piloting an HR apprenticeship program, registered apprenticeship program, which we're really excited about and also naturally made sense, because HR is the folk. The HR teams are the ones that are trying to convince other teams to take on apprenticeship programs. And so it would make sense for HR to also have an apprenticeship program to understand what the pain points are, because then you can speak to it from experience, as opposed to trying to sell people on a concept or idea where they're going to present to you the challenges, and you might not know how to respond to them, and so, so I always offer that just start local, start with what's in your locus of control, and let's see what lessons you can gain from that that can inform the way that you try and bring and motivate other people to come along. Julian Alssid: Very practical, very grounded. I really appreciate that. As we wind down this conversation, certainly, we want to keep following your work so you know there's watch just you'll see us poking around, and hopefully we can have another conversation when you're a little further down the road with the sound of it. Yeah. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow.  Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Thank you for this question. The center that I speak of is located at skillsfirstfuture.org and so when you visit that site, you'll see all of the components that I've discussed here. You'll see ways where you can tell us if we're missing resources that we should add, or even if you see an article that you thought, oh, this is really interesting. I'd like to share this. We love to hear about that. We have places where you can sign up to hear more about new things as we're developing them, and we will, in the future, be building a community component on there so that people can actually talk to each other about the types of things that they're doing in real time, and hopefully get some feedback there. So skillsfirstfuture.org is where you can learn more about all the things that I've discussed, and where you can plug in and talk to us as we're learning more things about how to accelerate some of this adoption for employers that hopefully will then benefit and inspire job seekers as well. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you for that, Isaac, really appreciate knowing how we can continue to follow this great and exciting new work and really again, appreciate you joining us for this conversation today. Isaac Agbeshie-Noye: Yes, thank you for having me. This was fun.  Julian Alssid: Thanks so much, Isaac. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation, and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info forward slash podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends, and if you're interested in learning more about Work Forces Consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.

Joe E. Ross, President, CEO and co-founder of Reach University and the National Center for the Apprenticeship Degree, discusses Reach University's "apprenticeship degree" model that turns jobs into degrees rather than the traditional approach of obtaining a job post-graduation. The conversation explores Reach's approach to addressing the "hiding in plain sight" talent crisis by serving the 40-50 million Americans in the workforce without degrees who wish they had them. Ross outlines Reach's three ABCs framework: Affordability, Based in the workplace from day one to graduation, and Credit for learning at work. He shares compelling outcomes from Reach's growth from 67 candidates to over 3,000 across eight states, with 70% graduation rates for Pell-eligible students compared to the typical 40-50%. Ross also discusses the National Center for the Apprenticeship Degree's work with 50 institutions across a dozen states, and offers practical steps for listeners interested in getting involved with apprenticeship degrees.  Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the Work Forces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education, industry and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in.  Julian Alssid: Welcome back today. We're diving deep into a topic that's central to our work, the evolution of higher education to better serve the modern workforce.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, we are Julian. We've talked a lot about the need for new models, especially those that bridge the gap between learning and earning. So many of our conversations have pointed to the power of apprenticeships and skills based pathways, including our past podcast discussions with Bob Lehrman and John Colborn on the evolution of apprenticeships and the opportunities they afford learners and employers alike.  Julian Alssid: That's right. Kaitlan and as we discussed with Bob and John, the apprenticeship movement has been gaining momentum in recent years. Just in August 2025 the Trump administration issued a talent strategy report that calls for the expansion of Federal Registered Apprenticeships, including promoting stronger connections to universities and colleges. Our guest today is at the forefront of this movement, pioneering a groundbreaking model that's reshaping what a degree can look like, the apprenticeship degree. In fact, the apprenticeship degree was called out in the Feds report as a key part of the new apprenticeship initiative. And so today, we'll be discussing this and more with Joe E Ross, President, CEO and co founder of Reach University and the National Center for the apprenticeship degree.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Before building Reach, Joe served as president of the statewide association for county school boards in California, and served for 10 years as a locally elected school board member. He previously served as general counsel to a venture studio in several technology startups, and as a deputy district attorney, he acted as sole counsel in numerous hearings and jury trials. Earlier in his career, he served eight years on active duty in the US Navy. The son of a US Postal Service labor custodian, Joe went on to earn degrees from Yale and Stanford Law School. And Joe, we're excited to welcome you to the podcast with us today. Thanks so much for joining us here.  Joe E. Ross: Kaitlin, Julian, it's such a pleasure to be here. Thanks for having me.  Julian Alssid: Yes, indeed, it is a pleasure to have you, and if you will, you know, we've said a little bit about your background, but we'd love to hear you tell us a little bit more, and the story of what led you to co found Reach. Joe E. Ross: Yeah, sure. So first off, I must offer the disclaimer, I never imagined that I would be a college president growing up. That's not the thing that was on my bucket list, among many things, but I do think I, very early on, acquired a conviction that education is the way you build your own future, I think of it as the pen that you need to have in your hand to write your own future. As you mentioned, my biological father worked for the post office as a labor custodian (that means janitor), and my mom died kind of young, and he was injured in an accident. And I was raised starting at age four by my aunt and uncle, and I think in moving into that new household, in my little head, I must have noticed that these adults had careers and they had degrees and they had power over their lives. And I think in my little head, I thought, I want all three of those things, and I got it into my head that education was my way to those things. That's the only thing I can point to as an explanation for why I was such a nerd in school and so motivated in school, and also why later, after trying all sorts of other things with that pen to my hand, I was a Navy officer, I was a prosecutor, I was an ed tech entrepreneur, I always tacked back to education as where my passion was, and so about 15 years ago, I started running an after school program that sought to turn after school staff into teachers, and that was essentially a job embedded, apprenticeship based program, the first of its kind. And I saw this, this potential of combining work with higher ed. And so fast forward to the fall of 2020, Reach University launched as it's in its current form as an accredited nonprofit institution with a very simple mission, which is to turn jobs into degrees, as you said in the intro, as opposed the other way around. And that model is called the apprenticeship degree. Now.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So you know. Reach University has a unique B2B2C model, right where you partner directly with employers, but you have this dual customer approach of working with employers but also serving the needs of your learners. Can we dive in a little bit there? I mean, this is a complex model to build. How have you gone about it?  Joe E. Ross: Yeah, so it's, it's interesting, it's complex, but it also creates some simplicity as well. If you're running an apprenticeship degree, by definition, you are running a model that's based in the workplace from day one to the day of graduation. In fact, I'll back up. I probably should share for everybody what we mean by apprenticeship degree, and then that will lead lead to the answer. So an apprenticeship degree is defined by elements associated with apprenticeship going back centuries. This is not something that the Department of Labor defined 50 years ago or 10 years ago or this summer. It's something that goes back to a tradition that is very long standing, and apprenticeships had three defining elements that I think of as the ABCs that apply to an apprenticeship degree, a stands for Affordability for the learner, and in this day and age, that means without student debt, apprentices have been asked for their sweat, not for their debt, right? So at Reach University, we made this commitment the beginning, that no one would be would pay out of pocket. No learner would pay out of pocket more than $75 a month for full time enrollment in a full time work embedded degree program that's a for affordability. B stands for Based in the workplace from day one to the day of graduation or the day of completion. An apprenticeship degree starts with a paid job. It ends, or is designed to end, with a better paid job. And C stands for Credit for work, Credit for learning at work. Kind of has a double meaning. Learning at work means literally learning at work, but it also means learning put to work, theory, meaning practice. C also stands for Credential of value. This is not a compromise. It is still a Bachelor of Arts or a Master of Arts or an Associate of Arts. AA does not stand for Apprenticeship Arts Degree. It stands for Associate of Arts degree. So with that definition in mind, let me go back to B based in the workplace. The reason we think of this as a B2B2C model, as opposed to a, B2C model is because you can't run an apprenticeship or an apprenticeship degree without close engagement with employers and for the university. What that means, among many things, is that instead of coming to the university looking for graduates, the employer comes to the university at the front end, bringing the students, you work with employers, and then the employers engage their incumbent workforce, or they actually recruit new employees into jobs that come with degrees. And so what you end up seeing is a lot of partnership work with employers, which is kind of shoe leather and handshaking and presence on the ground, as opposed to buying Google AdWords and competing in the internet for advertising for consumers. And as a result of that, a B2B2C model is much more affordable to execute, and that savings gets passed on to the apprentices, to the learners, in the form of much lower tuition, much more affordability.  Julian Alssid: So Joe, your model, in a sense, is helping to solve labor shortages. And want to hear you talk about, like, who these who these learners are, and what kinds of jobs you're preparing them for. This notion that there's like, this talent, and you know the term like hiding in hiding in plain sight, yeah, is really what you're about, yeah. Joe E. Ross: Well, we started five years ago with our teachers college, and we were focused on the teacher shortage. And by any estimate, there's many as 30 to 50,000 structural vacancies, to as much as 300,000 structural vacancies in teaching. And what we discovered is that in the very same buildings where principals were looking for teachers where there were classrooms without permanent staff, in those same buildings, there were a lot of human beings doing other jobs that didn't require degrees. They were working as classroom aides, as library aides, they were in the lunchroom, they were in the office, driving the bus. They were janitors, like my father and each of these individuals share, typically, the same story. At some point, they had to choose that job instead of a degree to take care of their family. For example, we did some research, because this was anecdotal, and this was something we were seeing on the ground, but we did some research. You know, if you look the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there's about 1.3 to 1.5 million classroom aids in this country, if there's only 50,000 teacher shortages, you only need a fraction of those aids, a fraction of those aides to get upskilled, earn a degree, to just end a teacher shortage. That type of ratio plays out in other high demand industries. If you look at nursing, there's a nursing shortage, but there's also a tremendous number of people working in hospitals as patient care assistants, or certified nursing assistants and many other roles who, if we actually treated those people as the talent we need and give them the opportunity to rise up, we would end these labor shortages and we create this upward mobility that we want this country to stand for. We bring it to life in places, particularly rural places that are education deserts. So that's basically the story here we have, on one hand, estimates suggest about 10 million high demand labor shortages in high demand industries, and on the other hand, there's 40 to 50 million people working in the workforce who do not have a degree, but surveys indicate they wish they did have a degree. And if we can actually move higher ed to think about that population, those 50 million people already in the workforce or about to enter the workforce, as the market for higher ed, as opposed to the 3 million graduating from high school every year, or maybe in addition to the 3 million who are graduating from high school every year, it's such a win, win. Higher ed has a new mission, 50 million people who were left out get brought back in, and we address labor shortages in high demand fields, particularly in rural, remote places where often the only answer is to do a grow your own effort, as opposed to recruiting effort.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Can you tell us a little bit, Joe about how this model works like a practical level. So you said, right? You know, people learners should be, you know, receiving credit for the work that they're doing on the job. But what does it look like to implement this? Joe E. Ross: I think the apprenticeship degree is always met with this kind of, oh, this sounds too good to be true. Somebody can have a paid job. Half the learning in their degree program comes from that paid job. The other half comes from seminars held at night or on the weekends or asynchronous instruction. There's no student debt. There's a better paid job waiting at the end of it. Employers are feeling labor shortages, individuals are getting upward economic mobility, and people are kind of like, well, that's genius. Too good to be true. How do you do you do it? Just like you just asked, here are some things that need to go into the design approach. First, employers to higher education providers need to work really closely together to make sure that the degree design meets the needs of the employer. In many ways, the employer is the customer here. They should be actually, in many cases, paying for the program instead of the learner, right? So you have to work with the employers to design now and teaching that's fairly straightforward, because every state knows what teachers need to know, and it's pretty common across state borders what teachers need to know. Similarly, in other professions like a nursing or radiological technician or other allied health fields, the standards of what you need to know in those professions as well now, but you still need to work with employers to make sure that the program design works. And then from there, the employers are also your key partners. I said earlier in recruiting their incumbent workforce, or their new hires into these pathways with the promise that their jobs are not just job type jobs, but jobs that turn into degrees and then give you upward mobility after completion of a certain set period of time. In terms of the actual design of the model, part of what's required here is to rethink some practices that are often taken as rules or laws or regulations, but are just habits In higher education. And I'll give you one example. There's something called the Carnegie Unit that is about the ratio of seat time to homework time, essentially. And this is seen as a barrier to work embedded degree programs, because, oh my gosh, we had to have this much seat time, and then people have to, have to do this, this much homework, and then they have to work 40 hours a week. How do you fit it all in? And so one of the things that we did from the beginning said, Look, you can reimagine the Carnegie Unit as being a function of seat time and work time as opposed to seat time and homework time, right? So if you can combine seat time with assignments on the job, or sense making around what you're doing on the job instead of mindless, irrelevant problem sets or whatever the case may be busy work. But actually make work work, the work instead of busy work, the work. You can actually create an environment where for a learner, and this is the objective for a worker, one plus one in this case, equals one. It should feel like their job and their higher education pathway are the same thing. That's the key element of efficiency here that needs to go into the design. And then from there, there's things in a higher education credential that people think, Well, how could you do that in the workplace? For example, you need to know English or critical thinking or history or writing, or all these things that are referred to as general education? Well, it turns out you can carefully design the liberal arts component of almost any professional or occupational degree to be relevant to that occupation. We're designing a program right now in behavioral health, for example. And to get an associate or bachelor's degree, you need something that looks like writing and reading and literature for to be a degree, but you can choose something that's relevant. So we have a semester we're designing where there's two tracks of learning. One is psychology, one, two and three, which is with one faculty member, and then there's practice on the job. And the other track is literature, but it's going to be the literature of mental illness, right? And it's going to feel really integrated with the psychology track, and it's going to be relevant to the job. So that's the kind of curricular design work that I think the apprenticeship degree needs to entail. Because at the end of the day, these are working adults, and we know what working adults need, and we sometimes are really good at giving them what they need at the graduate level, but now we have to give them what they need at the undergraduate level to make sure the associate degree in the bachelor's degree truly is working better.  Julian Alssid: It's all about that context, really, and just baking it in all around. So then, given this integration and approach like, what are the metrics that you're using to track and what's your impact today?  Joe E. Ross: Yeah, we started with 67 candidates in our pilot cohort in the Louisiana and Arkansas Deltas. That was five years ago. We'll have well over 3,000 candidates across almost 500 school districts in eight states as of this fall. So the program is growing. That's one metric that's important. And in some places, school districts and parishes are reporting the sentiment that their teacher shortage seems to be going away, which is great news, and in part, that's because of programs like, like Reach University, and that's exciting to see when, when do you get to, like, actually solve a major social problem as a nonprofit leader in your life, it's always something on the horizon. We're actually seeing shortages go away, which is amazing. Notably, the population we're serving are overwhelmingly Pell eligible. And so Pell eligibility, I think, is a good proxy for economic need. And any given semester, roughly 70 to 75% of our enrollment is Pell eligible, 37 to 39 year old folks with families and full time jobs, and so they're eligible for Pell. And the typical graduation rate at the undergraduate level for someone who is Pell eligible is a shocking 40 to 50%. In our program. It's on track to be 70% for all our almost all of our cohorts. And I think actually, we have a tailwind in this case, because the number one reason that people who are Pell eligible drop out is economics. They need a job, but in an apprenticeship degree, they already have a job. So you've removed one of the major barriers to completion of a college degree when you pair the degree with a paid job from beginning to end. And so it's not surprising that we're seeing much better completion rates. We also look at retention, you know, the you know, retention is kind of along the way. The most challenging year for a Pell eligible first generation student is the first year of college. And so you really, you can't lose 30 or 40% in year one and have anything close to a 70% graduation rate, obviously, four years later, five years later, and and so we tracked that first year persistence really carefully, and we constantly, actually redesigned our first year to make sure that our first year candidates would had a better retention. We had some cohorts we didn't really like the numbers, like it was down to 70% for one cohort or 65% for another. And we redesigned our first year to integrate the general education courses and make them more working embedded. And so this first cohort is 91 to 92% retention. That's very, very good for a Pell eligible first year persistence. And then at the end of the program, we absolutely need to look at who, not only how many are completing, but how many of those who complete are actually getting the job that is waiting for them. Very often, if not in the same building, it's in the same employer network or the same community. But how many are actually getting that job, and then in a few years, in how many of them are seeing income gains? And if there's a measure of efficacy in the job, whether it's teaching or allied health, how are they doing as compared to peers who came through traditional pathways? And it's still early days for us, because we just graduated our first set of career graduated our first set of cohorts, but early data look very, very good in terms of both obtaining the job, getting the pay raise, and being rated by their employers as better than, at least equal or better than, in terms of performance folks who came through the traditional pathways.  Kaitlin LeMoine: These are some exciting initial outcomes. I know you said it's early days, but it must be exciting to be seeing these, you know, these types of success metrics, and I'm sure hearing success stories as well, right? Those, those anecdotes and qualitative feedback on on the program. So congratulations on that. I think you started to touch upon it a little bit with the redesign of your first year. I'm curious to know, like, what are some of the challenges you've experienced in these first five years of operation, and maybe give us an example or two on how you've addressed them, because it's certainly, as you said, maybe there's elements of this that simplify higher ed, but it's a really interesting model, and I feel like still relatively new overall in the higher ed landscape.  Joe E. Ross: When we first launched this undergraduate apprenticeship degree, we literally planned the semester right in time, right so we couldn't have any transfer students. We brought people in with no prior credit, and we kind of designed that first semester for them as they took it, and then the second semester was designed just in time, and we went through the whole program designing one term ahead of the first cohort. And then when we had upper division cohorts, we started accepting and transfers. Well, we learned a lesson the first year, because the first year, we actually tried to provide four or five work embedded courses at once to our first year students, which meant they had four or five different faculty at once. I don't know what we were thinking, but it's what we did. And of course, the feedback was, this is great, but this is really hard, right? That was the feedback generally from candidates and assignments were on the same time, and people were trying to remember the name of their faculty and their faculty and their peers and all that. And, at the end of that first year, we said, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, there is a best practice here that it's already out there online higher education does one course at a time. This is a best practice for working adults. We already know that. And I went to the faculty and I said, look, we've got to do one course at a time. We can't do this five courses at once. And there was a little bit of concern because our faculty who, by the way, are job embedded too. So these were folks who are working in schools as principals, assistant superintendents, as master teachers. And they understood what I was saying, but they also were like, you know, I don't think we can get to know the candidates in five weeks if it's a five week course, or in 10 weeks, if it's 10 week course. And so what we decided to do, as we built the second year is designed a single subject, not a course, but a single subject semester. How do we integrate all the courses as one subject area, where one faculty member essentially would teach three or four, three courses back to back, but they were essentially the same type of course. So world history, us, history and social studies for teachers, integrated as one experience, but three courses on the transcript as an example. And so we did that for the second year and the third year and the fourth year, and retention and persistence and satisfaction and outcomes on licensure tests just moved up and to the right and then we finally, as I said earlier, got back to the first year, and we finally redesigned the first year. We're seeing great retention the first year as well. So I think we maybe should have known this before we started, but we essentially delivered to higher ed an AB test of what it looks like to have four or five courses at once, an apprenticeship degree, as opposed to one subject at a time. And the results are kind of overwhelming. Someone should write the paper on this and get tenure somewhere. But that's, that's, that's one of the big lessons we had at the gate.  Julian Alssid: Well, speaking of challenges, Joe, we know that you know your National Center for Apprenticeship Degrees is a thing that you've launched, and that it's working with traditional colleges and universities to adopt an apprenticeship model. Interested to hear about what you're doing there. And you know, we know that, you know you're getting to design this. You know, Reach University from scratch. What's it like? And what are the you know, what are the challenges you're facing with the traditional colleges and universities? And how are NCAD overcoming these challenges?  Joe E. Ross: So we launched NCAD about two years ago. NCAD stands for National Center for the Apprenticeship Degree. And in part, we launched it because we had a teacher's college. And everywhere I went, people would say, this is a great idea. Can you do this in my advanced manufacturing facility over here? That actually happened. I was visiting a school district in West Memphis, and the assistant superintendent said, you have to meet my husband. He runs this factory across the river in Memphis. I was like, okay, so I visit this factory, and they give me a hard hat, which was fun. And they're manufacturing switches for railroad tracks with all this very, very next level equipment. And they take me through the factory to the back, and there's a state of the art classroom where this employer was actually taking people out of high school and putting them through advanced math and engineering classes so they could run the equipment. And he says to me, I should be able to confer an associate degree for all the training I'm doing on the job, and it would make it easier for me to recruit people into this workplace, if I could do that. That story times 100 made it really clear that this idea of an apprenticeship degree was not just for teaching or even allied health, but that this is something that could be part of a larger workforce and human capital strategy across industries, across geographies, and we're a startup nonprofit, the idea that we could address all that demand seemed a little nutty, but we did believe that what we were doing could be something that, together with other innovators, could create a tipping point, and that the larger mission of changing higher education - bringing it into the workplace was something that we could pursue. And so we launched the Center for the Apprenticeship Degree. And your question, I think, touches on the built in challenge there, because essentially, what we're asking higher education to do is to disrupt itself, right? Like classic disruption is about a simpler product that's more relevant to a larger consumer base that's not consuming. So targets non-consumption, and it's supposed to be something much, much less expensive, right? All of those things are really, really hard for big established players to do. Now there's some big established players that have figured out how to do it. You all came from Southern New Hampshire University. Did disruptive things there, ASU does disruptive things Western Governors, but there's 4000 higher ed institutions in this country, and not all of them are going to just drop everything and create a affordable face in the workplace, degree that rewards credit for work. But what we did realize is that there are some who are doing and that this is a field that's emerging, and one of the things you have to attend to in system change is avoiding fragmentation of an emerging, fragile field. So the first thing out of three that NCAT is doing is attending to making sure we're bringing together the emerging field of higher ed institutions and innovative, forward thinking employers who are launching apprenticeship degrees to address talent needs or to get an edge on their competition, whatever their purpose is. And that has been really successful. We've worked with 50 different institutions across over a dozen states where this is beginning to emerge. The second thing we took on with the Center for the Apprenticeship Degrees is, because we're out there in the field, we're we've become aware of who is really doing amazing things in the field. And so when a system or a state or a college wants to launch a program like this, we're able to provide capacity building support. And we've been doing that in Massachusetts and Colorado and a few other states as well. And then finally, there's a need to kind of build an emerging knowledge base about this field. And so NCAD, the National Center the Apprenticeship Degree, is focused on that as well. The challenge here is, I go back to the ABCs I mentioned before. All three of them are really hard. Affordability is hard because since the 1970s most of higher ed has had the assumption of unlimited student debt without underwriting at least at the graduate level, and that's created kind of a lack of discipline around designing high quality things at an affordable price. So that's that's a big challenge. Being based in the workplace means partnering with employers and changing your recruitment, changing your design strategies. It's not that that's hard to do. It's just not in the muscle memory of a lot of places yet. And then C credit for learning at work means giving up some of the sort of ownership and the direct control over where learning happens, and letting the assessment of skills and capacities and knowledge happen in the workplace that's challenging as well. There's a book that came out a while back called Whatever It Is I'm Against It, by a former college president, and it points to how it's how hard it is, generally in higher ed to work through committees. Committees don't generally drive innovation, but that's it's actually more complex than that, a degree is something that has the fingerprints of dozens of departments. It's not just the school of education that gives you a teaching degree or the school of nursing that gives you a nursing degree. They need to provide general education, which means they have to negotiate with history and anthropology and sociology and all these places that are providing these other courses and making them work. Embedded is possible, but it's a big change. And so at NCAD, the best thing we can do is not tell people what to do, but to surface examples of other places that are similarly situated, that have actually done this. And in Alabama, the phrase that I first heard, I first heard, I first heard in Alabama from the director of apprenticeship in Alabama. The key here is R&D, which stands for rip off and duplicate, meaning like, if we can actually at NCAD, enable folks who are trying to innovate to know what others are doing and steal from them. That's the theory of change here. Because innovators and entrepreneurs, whether they're in academics or technology, do not want to be told what to do, but they're very happy to steal from steal from others. It's kind of the congenital approach of an entrepreneur. So at NCAD, we're trying to make it easy for people to steal from each other, steal from us, and steal from each other, so that this model, which is such a great model, can grow and expand and be more available.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So I would say, building off that point, Joe, you know, we always ask, What practical steps could you provide to our audience around becoming forces in developing apprenticeship degrees? I mean, we could take it from the perspective of, you know, a new employer partner or, like you're saying, a traditional, a more traditional college or university that's interested in pursuing this out of an approach. Joe E. Ross: I think wherever you sit, whether you're an employer or an educator or a policymaker, I think the first step is to stop being part of a system that forces to choose, people to choose between a job and a degree. So ask, what can we do to convert jobs into degrees that then enable people to have the opportunity to be skilled up and to rise up in their workplace. So for employers, one of the one of the big opportunities here, I think, is to move from thinking of education as a benefit, which many employers already already do, to thinking about jobs that are designed to confer qualifications, certificates, and degrees by design. Because if your jobs are not dead end, but instead developmental, you attract a different kind of talent. And there's so many young people right now, including my own children, who are out of college, who judge the quality of a job by what they think they will learn and what people will see that they have learned in that job. So think about jobs as places where your workplace becomes kind of a college campus. I think that's the call to action for employers, for higher ed leaders. I think that getting around this idea that you can deliver quality but also be radically affordable. It's hard for some to imagine, but it's eminently doable, and part of the way you do that is letting your employers drive your enrollment strategy, which saves a ton of money. And number two, really looking for effective ways leveraging technology and and best practices to award credit for work. Everyone knows that doing is a way of learning. Learning by doing is the expression, right? But that doesn't have to water down the academic enterprise. You could do so much sense making with what people are doing on the job. That makes it still true higher education. And then finally, I'd say policymakers, we're strong advocates of policymakers at the federal, state, local level, looking for ways to bring forth predictable funding that has incentives for affordability and outcomes built in unlimited debt does not incent affordability and full time enrollment dollars don't necessarily incent outcomes. So I think the challenge here for policymakers is, how do you set up mechanisms that cause the market to answer the call? If I knew that if somebody completed X amount of credit and learning in x, in y, amount of time, I would be paid Z, amount of dollars upon proven completion. I take that deal every day because I know my program achieves those outcomes, and it's a better use of public dollars, as opposed to sort of stuffing the channels, which is what we've done over the last 50 years. Basically just make it easier for people to go in debt, make it easier for people to go, encourage everybody to go. That's gotten us into this, right? So I think policymakers have a real opportunity here, with the changes that we're seeing at the federal and state level to incentivize apprenticeship degrees, to deliver the kind of outcomes that I'm talking about. And I think actually we're going to see some movement here on this front I actually think there's a lot of conversation. It is a bipartisan issue. Everybody seems to love the idea of apprenticeship, and everybody loves the idea of an apprenticeship that leads to a degree. So I think there's a lot of hope to be had here on this front.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, no, it's so true. It is definitely. And I kind of was implying that in my little first comments, that this is, you know, there's been this growing movement, and it's totally bipartisan. And I think a lot of the challenge has been that, you know, it's perceived as really hard to do and come and bureaucratic and cumbersome and and what's been so wonderful talking to you is how you know, clear eyed you are about this, how you break it down, you know. And obviously there's a lot of complexity, and I'm sure there's way more, many more challenges as of course, there always are. But that, you know, here you have this entrepreneurial pursuit that's getting things done. You have some strategies for the the legacy institutions and and, you know, at a time when there's really heightened interest and it's all over the place. Everyone's got issues. Employers can't find the talent they need. People don't want to go into debt forever and get nothing in return. And so I guess the perfect start winding down. Would love to hear from you about how our listeners can learn more and continue to follow your work. Joe E. Ross: Well, great. I love the opportunity to invite people to visit our website and invite people to visit our social media channels. Reach.edu is where you can find Reach University. Join us there if you are interested in the National Center for the apprenticeship degree at ncad.org, N-C-A-D dot org, we have a podcast. It's called Apprenticeship 2.0. It comes out every two weeks, so tune in, and we'll actually tell people to tune into your podcast as well, because this is a great conversation for people to tune into, and the other ones have been as well. We're on LinkedIn. We post a lot of LinkedIn if you're truly interested in getting involved in this movement, if you email [email protected] someone, someone will get back to you and connect you to a way to get involved in launching and expanding the apprenticeship degree movement the United States. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you for sharing all of those various avenues for people to get involved and learn more. And appreciate you joining us on show today. Joe E. Ross: It's been a pleasure. Thanks for having me and I look forward to to the continued conversation. Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation, and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell. If you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot info, forward slash podcast. You can also find  Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about workforces consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.

Kaitlin LeMoine and Julian Alssid turn the microphone on themselves to kick off Season 5 of the Work Forces podcast. As they approach their 50th episode, the co-hosts reflect on their journey and the dramatic shifts they've witnessed at the intersection of work and learning. Kaitlin and Julian discuss the evolution of workforce development from a fringe topic to a central national priority, highlighting how this shift has been influenced by economic, political, and technological changes. They unpack the rise of a skills-based ecosystem, noting how the traditional "once and done" model of education has become obsolete in an era of rapid technological change, particularly with the widespread adoption of generative AI. Drawing on their consulting work and insights from past guests, the co-hosts emphasize the imperative of cross-sector collaboration and human-centered design in bridging the gap between education and industry. They stress that experiential learning is now the new currency of opportunity, and human connection remains the "secret sauce" for success. Kaitlin and Julian offer practical advice for leaders navigating this period of unprecedented change. They encourage listeners to embrace agility and partnership, keep their eye on the prize of helping individuals thrive, and anchor their work in human purpose to build a more equitable and prosperous future for all. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to the workforces Podcast. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with innovators who are shaping the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: This podcast is an outgrowth of our Work Forces consulting practice. Through weekly discussions, we seek to share the trends and themes we see in our work and amplify impactful efforts happening in higher education, industry, and workforce development all across the country. We are grateful to Lumina Foundation for its past support during the initial development and launch of this podcast, and invite future sponsors of this effort. Please check out our Work Forces podcast website to learn more. And so with that, let's dive in.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So Julian, we're at an exciting point here, kicking off Season Five. Can't believe it. We're rapidly coming up on 50 episodes and two years of hosting this podcast. Thanks to all of our guests and listeners who have supported this work so far, and we're excited to be in this new season, and it felt like a good moment to welcome everyone and take this moment to share our own perspectives. It feels like a good time to flip the mic back on ourselves and share a bit of our own thinking at this evolving and fast moving intersection of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Yes, it indeed is a milestone moment for us, Kaitlin, as we embark on Season Five here, and it's been such a pleasure working with you, consulting with you, and podcasting with you. And also, I'm so grateful to our guests and our audience for making this possible. It's just as as we had hoped from the beginning, as this kind of grew out of our consulting, it really has just become kind of a natural corollary and feedback loop for us to keep learning and sharing and learning and sharing. So let's learn and share with one another today. Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely well, the feeling is mutual. Thank you for your partnership over the last few years in this work and in our consulting efforts. And yeah, excited to dive in with this conversation today. So I guess to kick us off, Julian, you know, given your many years in this space and in the last few years of our work together, you know, how are you seeing the intersection of work and learning, changing and evolving. What are you paying attention to? What are you thinking about?  Julian Alssid: I keep going back to the same point when I really think back to my like, 35 years in the field. You know when I started this, and even when we met over a decade ago, this was still fringe work. It was people interested in workforce development were basically the people who were working on workforce development in one form or another, and it has gone from front to center, I think, driven mostly by economic imperative, you know, by rising skill demands and gaps between learners and employers and everyone trying to find a better way to come together. It's been enforced, and I think, fed further by policy. So for example, I mean, I guess I will say it's and have been saying this for a long time too. It's really been kind of an apple pie topic that cuts across the political spectrum, and so, you know, and we're and we're even seeing that with all the change going on now. The Biden administration, previous administration, made significant investments in workforce development, and that helped to accelerate and focus attention across industry and government and education. And just recently, the Trump administration released its new talent strategy report, which kind of lays out a plan for a more streamlined system. Now, of course, these approaches are very different, and I think along with that is this kind of great sense of uncertainty, like, well, where will these new policies drive us and so it's, it's kind of like we're all dressed up and not exactly sure where to go. Kaitlin LeMoine: Right. Well, and everything's moving so quickly too, right? Like it's it's the policy, it's also the tech space. It's also how industries are shifting very, very quickly, and just trying to keep pace and kind of keep all of these different changes on our radar screens while still moving the work forward feels like a key challenge. Julian Alssid: Yeah. So, yes, absolutely. I mean, and there's just so many pieces of this to unpack. I mean, what do you see as, like, what is, what is rising to the surface for you? Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah? I mean, I think that one of the things that strikes me that feels distinct from other points, I guess, in my work in this field over the many years is that I feel like there's so much happening for employers and industry, for educators, whether in K 12 or in higher ed, and for learners, kind of all at the same time. And maybe it's partially that, you know, the focus of my work has shifted to over the years, like from being very focused on implementing one program, or one initiative, or thinking about tactically, how to go about doing things, versus also now operating at a level of thinking about how does this broader landscape impact work with different types of clients, but it just feels like there's so much movement for employers as they think about how to hire and train and recruit the next generation of employees. Then there's the next generation of learners, and how we are educating those individuals, whether they're from some of our podcast conversations, right, like in middle school, or whether they're in higher ed or adult learners who are looking to advance further. And then for the actual people you know, for those learners, as they're looking for jobs and looking to advance. It just feels like there's so much movement, so much at stake, and it's like this moment of de siloing wherever possible, because we're all like, there's this recognition that employers can't do this work without educators. Educators can't do this work without employers, and we need this feedback loop in order to really try to all advance in this complex intersection of work and learning together, that's I feel like, really top of mind for me at this moment. Julian Alssid: Yeah, it is. It is so complex. And I like to try to think about like, well, what are the kind of, what are the threads that run through it all? Kind of try to bring some clarity and and one that that keeps popping to mind for me is this whole idea of the the rise of a skills based ecosystem that, you know, I think that you know that there was so much talk for years about, you know, kind of the knowledge based economy and, and I do think we are, on some level, shifting to more of a skills based economy. And I was even just thinking back to like interviews we did. I remember Matt Siegelman from Burning Glass Institute talked about the study that Burning Glass had done back in, I think '22 that showed that at that point, the average job had seen 30% of its skills replaced in five years. And so this whole idea of kind of the one and done model of education becomes obsolete. And by the way, that 37% figure came before the widespread adoption of generative AI. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah. So what does it mean now? Right? Julian Alssid: Yeah, exactly. Are we moving now? Right? It was bad enough then, and you could see the gaps, and you could see people employers complaining about not getting the skills, and people frustrated with their education, saying they're not getting what they need. And yes, but I think what we're seeing now is employers are increasingly prioritizing skills and competencies. Their still certainly their leadership has degrees, but it's definitely moving to the fore. Kaitlin LeMoine: No, I think that's, I think that's right. I mean, I think one thing that stuck out to me from our past, from our episodes this past season, kind of building on that, you know, were a couple of different conversations just around this integration of, like, career advice, support, and transparency, kind of across this ecosystem and certainly being built more into the educational experience. Like you know, whether it was our conversation with Nisha Taylor, with NACE regarding both the career competencies and making the skills and competencies that learners are acquiring clear and transparent, like how to talk about those things with employers, how to make it ring true to employers. And then even thinking back to Scott Carlson and Ned Laff with their Hacking College book, and thinking about how do we really make the experiential learning more embedded through, like, a field of study type approach in the higher ed experience, right? Like, so it's like, I think what you're saying about this knowledge based economy and this becoming more front and center there, I think is more and more great work being done around, how do we bridge that gap and make the language we're using clear across employers and learning institutions, so that it's like this is what people know and can do, and learners know how to communicate it. And actually the transparency thread is has been woven into our consulting work as well. We support clients in researching and determining learning pathways that lead to career progression in order to make opportunities clearer for both learners and employees, who may themselves be at very different stages of their career journeys. So, you know, I guess really, so much of it's about being explicit, about naming the skills being acquired in a way that's useful for learners, especially at this moment with AI where it can be really challenging to make oneself distinct. And really, so much of it's about being able to communicate your knowledge, your experience and what you know and can do. Julian Alssid: Exactly, and it's really leading so many of the institutions to adapt their curriculum and embrace this sort of new model of education that focuses on skills and practical applications. So how do you do that, while maintaining, you know, academic standards to the degree that you feel those. Are important, you know, we know those academic skills, or are the skills that carry people longest in their careers and and I think part of what also adds to this complexity is this proliferation of new tools to kind of inform and support the entire learning and advising and hiring cycle, right? So it's a blizzard of information and activity that all revolves around this kind of rise of a sort of skills based ecosystem and redefining the role of education. Kaitlin LeMoine: No, I think that that's right. I mean, and it does make me think about, like, what does all of this mean for us? Like, in our consulting work too, right? Like, because, because, I think for all of us, I mean, every time we're on this podcast, right, there's this element of like, how can we be forces in this work? How do we apply this work to our own our own lives, our own efforts? It feels like it's like we're talking about these big picture challenges and and areas of opportunity and like, as as we're talking it's making me think, well, as we go about our own work, I think one of the things we're trying to do is both drive projects and initiatives forward in collaboration with our clients, while also being mindful and aware of this landscape and remaining kind of up to date on what's happening, what's current, right? And like, trying to decipher, okay, what do we need to pay immediate attention to, and what's like a thread to be monitoring, but like, we keep the work going, right, right? Like, that feels like a piece of the work that's just now inherent in everything we take on. As far as, like, one idea for, like, practical implementation of all this learning. It's just part of how we approach it now. Julian Alssid: No, for sure, and  it's interesting because I think it calls for sort of a level of discipline on our part, as well as our clients or partners, that didn't exist previously. It's just, again, trying to keep the focus on what we are trying to accomplish? So for example, and that just keeps bringing me back to like, what are the what are the things that matter, no matter how much is changing that you need to keep the handle on and and one that comes to mind for me, and I look back at last season and thinking about our consulting, as well as is the imperative of partnerships and the need for cross sector collaboration. And you know, the idea that no one partner can do this alone is way, way too complex.   Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely, and that's where so much of where consulting work takes place, as the external partner that helps develop and facilitate these partnerships to ensure stakeholder alignment and a continuous feedback loop that allows different partners to bring their unique vanity points and perspectives to the table, while also being mindful and aware of the broader landscape in which we're all operating and collaborating and working together can help to unearth where there might otherwise be hiccups, like you were thinking of it this way. Oh, I was thinking of it that way. How can we come together before we design a solution? Julian Alssid: Exactly, I'm thinking about the work we're doing now with a community college in Massachusetts and its partners around manufacturing. It really is about what each partner brings to the table that's unique. In this case, the educators educate, the employers run businesses. There's a lot of nuance there in the perspectives, and how do you communicate them, and how do you get everyone on the same page so they can, right up front, have the basis for a solid partnership that's going to ultimately make a difference? Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, exactly. I mean, this is difficult and complicated work. Julian Alssid: Yeah, and it's often why we're brought in as consultants. So given all of that, what can people do to be forces at this rapid time of change and transition?  Kaitlin LeMoine: And maybe this sounds too optimistic, but there's a part of me that's like, let's continue to drive good work forward, right? There's so many amazing programs, initiatives like that are really focused on helping learners succeed, meet their next milestone, their next goal, whether it's workforce development, a training program, you know, four year degree, whatever it is, right? Like, there's so many great initiatives moving like, I think at moments of, like, a lot of change in transition. It's almost like, don't stop, like, there's the need to slow down and reevaluate and be aware of what's going on. But also, there's just so much need that, like the work will continue in some way, shape or form. And I think, like I'd said earlier, the other thing is really to remain as much as possible, like remaining current, right on, on these shifts, maybe without it letting without any one new bit of information totally driving you in a totally new direction. Because I think it can feel like oh, wait a minute, this is the new the newest information on AI, what do we do with this? And it's like, well, how does that new information fit within the existing strategy you have in place? How can you learn from that information or incorporate it without maybe it upending? Like, you know, whatever your strategy or plan is, those are a couple things that stick out to me.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, it's. Funny as you say that, what popped in my mind is, you know, technology alone does not solve the workforce challenges totally, at least not yet. But in fact, I think for me, two points that kind of come to the fore in terms of what we can do to be forces in this time of change as well. One is the main one is just to kind of keep our eye on the prize, because it is, as you say, so easy to get caught up in the swirl or chase down rabbit holes and and at the core, you know, the intersection of work and learning is about helping individuals thrive and growing the economy. It's kind of this dual customer focus, as we like to say, and so I think therefore our clients, our customers, our audience and us all need to embrace agility and partnership. We really need to adopt this mindset of continuous learning and adaptability, because this things are changing, and they're gonna keep changing and changing. I mean, you know, we're like again, we've barely begun to factor in AI to what the impact on work, and if you look at the amount of money being invested, it's going to have an impact, no matter what the reports today are telling us.  Kaitlin LeMoine: The impacts are already happening, right?  Julian Alssid: They're already happening, but they're going to be way more massive than anyone will probably realizes or wants to admit. You know, I think back to the conversation we had even a couple of seasons ago with Pardis Madhavi, who's, you know, former university president who talked with us in Season Three about how leaders of institutions have to embrace a high tolerance for failure and a culture of nimbleness and, you know, in order to remain relevant, and I think that's something we all need to do. And then the other is just not to lose sight of the fact that this all has to be anchored, this work has to be anchored in human purpose. I mean, that's the secret sauce, right? Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, no, I think one of the things that sticks out now more than ever, and it's come up in a couple of our podcast conversations with, I think, with Matt Siegelman and Julia Freeland Fisher just around, like the human connection piece, right? Like so much of, I think what's happening now is re emphasizing the importance of human skills and like, how do we make sure those connections remain and that we continue to build skills like problem solving and critical thinking and communication, right, like not let go of those skills as as these other technological advancements, as you said, right, continue to push us in new in kind of unchartered directions.  Kaitlin LeMoine: It was on Jean Eddie this, this quote kept popping out at me as I went back to listen to our earlier podcasts in preparation for this discussion, is Jean Eddy from American Student Assistance said that the goal is to help students find a path that makes their hearts sing. And I think ultimately we've just got to keep that human focus. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yep, yep. I think that's right. Julian Alssid: So with that said, you know, here we are ready to launch our next set of interviews, where we will certainly continue to unpack and delve into these and more topics as they emerge. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yep, we're kicking off Season Five, and we'll be diving in our next episode with new guests and a whole new season. So thank you, Julian, for taking the time to talk with me today. Julian Alssid: This is great, Kaitlin, and we should definitely do this more often, and maybe even dive in a little. You know, people have said to us, our listeners have said they want to learn more about what we do and, you know, and our views. So there you go, there's a little bit of it, and we'll be back with more. This is a teaser, so look forward to continuing this conversation. Kaitlin LeMoine: Indeed. Thank you all for listening. We'll be back soon.  Kaitlin LeMoine: We hope you enjoyed today's conversation, and appreciate you tuning in to Work Forces. Thank you to our listeners and guests for their ongoing support, and a special thanks to our producer, Dustin Ramsdell, if you're interested in sponsoring the podcast or want to check out more episodes, please visit workforces dot, info forward, slash podcast. You can also find Work Forces wherever you regularly listen to your favorite podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, like, and share it with your colleagues and friends. And if you're interested in learning more about Work Forces Consulting, please visit workforces dot info forward slash consulting for more details about our multi service practice.  

Scott Carlson and Ned Laff, authors of "Hacking College," discuss how to craft a higher education experience that intentionally links student learning to future work and career success. They emphasize the necessity of a proactive and personalized approach to higher education, tapping into students' passions and hidden intellectualism. Carlson and Laff champion a field of study approach, empowering students to actively design their undergraduate degrees, unearth hidden job markets, and leverage faculty expertise. They underscore the significance of cultural and social capital, urging institutions to adapt and support this student-centric model. The conversation illuminates the ways that higher education administrators and faculty, and students themselves, can personalize the learning experience to ensure higher ed graduates are well-equipped to navigate diverse career opportunities. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Happy summer all. We're back with one more rewind episode featuring Scott Carlson and Ned Laff. And in this conversation, we dive deep into their new book Hacking College. Amongst many topics, we discuss a framework to approach college and the college experience with a personalized focus on future careers and long-term goals. We hope you enjoy this conversation and look forward to kicking off our next season in our next episode. So Julian, I've noticed a real shift in our conversations lately, both with clients and on the podcast, we seem to be delving deeper into the complexities of the school-to-work transition, especially for young adults and for working adults. Julian Alssid: It's true. Kaitlin, and it really highlights the increasing complexity of that transition. The job market is constantly evolving, and it can be tough for students to figure out where they fit in, especially with so many opportunities hidden from public view. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, exactly. I mean, it's a tall order for educators and institutions too. For example, faculty are being asked to wear many hats and skills like career advising can sometimes feel separate from their day to day roles and require new sets of tools and related training. Julian Alssid: Right? It's not just about helping students find a job, but about guiding them through a process of self discovery, exploration and network building and helping them understand their own interests and strengths and how those connect to real world opportunities. Kaitlin LeMoine: And that's where I think our guests today, Scott Carlson and Ned Laff, have some really valuable insights. They've literally written the book on this. It's called "Hacking College", and we're talking to them on the book's release date. Julian Alssid: Yes, and congratulations, guys. The book offers a framework for faculty and staff to help students take a more proactive and personalized approach to their college experience with a real focus on future careers and life goals. Kaitlin LeMoine: Though we'll ask Scott and Ned, to give their own background, Scott's a Senior Writer at The Chronicle of Higher Education, where he's been writing about the trends shaping higher education for over 25 years. As his LinkedIn profile states, he writes about where education is headed, how it serves or doesn't serve students and the public, and how the sector can stay relevant and resilient.  Julian Alssid: And Ned has over 35 years of experience in higher ed, helping students design successful undergraduate experiences. He's held leadership roles at numerous colleges and universities focused on academic advising, curriculum development and student engagement. Kaitlin LeMoine: Scott and Ned, welcome to Work Forces. Congratulations on the publication of this book, and we're excited to dive in with you today to learn more about Hacking College.  Ned Laff: Thank you so much.  Scott Carlson: Thanks for having us on. Julian Alssid: So to get the conversation started, love to hear a bit more about your respective backgrounds and how you came together to write this book.  Scott Carlson: Well, as Kaitlin had said, I was at The Chronicle for about 25 years. I've you know, in the years leading up to the pandemic, I was writing a lot about inequality and the path from college to work. I wrote a couple of Chronicle reports about the future of work and how students wind up getting jobs. And in writing some of this, these reports, and writing some of these stories, the follow up stories in The Chronicle, I had been getting a lot of notes from one Ned Laff who had been contacting me and had been working in this area for some time. And this is, in fact, how we got to know each other and got to meet each other, because Ned was just writing me over and over again about, oh, there's a better way. There's a better way to do this. I'll let him take the story from there. Ned Laff: Yeah, I have the work that I had been doing in higher ed. It's hard to call it something like advising. It's, it's in this middle, middle ground. I got into this when I was a grad student at the University of Illinois in Urbana, where I was working in a program called Individual Plans of Study, where students could design their own academic major, provided it couldn't be done in any of the colleges at the University of Illinois Urbana. And what we began to find out working is that students would be coming in and we would help them figure out how they could do essentially, the heart of an individual plan of study, but underneath the rubric of a major. And that started to raise questions in my mind about what is the nature of a college curriculum from the eyes of a student. What is the relationship of a college curriculum to the world of work? If there is this giant thing called the hidden job market, which is not advertised in career services, you don't see it on, you don't see it on. Indeed. You don't see it anywhere. And what does this mean in terms of student engagement, and how students can tap what they're genuinely interested in, what we call hidden intellectualism, and how they actually better engage learning and and the university they're at. And I would send Scott these. I'm like, probably about 100 emails a week, just nagging them. I got something here. I got something here. Just give me five minutes, though. Kaitlin LeMoine: You share about this in this, in the book, a little bit. We'd love to hear about how the book title came to be. And can you share a bit about the major challenges you hope to tackle when writing this book? Scott Carlson: Well, I think when I was writing some of that stuff for the Chronicle about the path from college to work, I was sort of following along the kind of narrative that everyone else sort of follows. And it's, you know, it's sort of about skills. What do you do with liberal arts education? How do you get students to land internships and all of that. And you know, really, one of the points that we that we make in hacking college is that a lot of that just sort of comes about by luck. For a lot of students, they just sort of happen to run into the right person who shows them how to play the game, or they come from a lot of social and cultural capital that sort of paves the way to where they want to go. And part of what we're trying to do with hacking college is to describe, kind of, the principles of how people wind up creating valuable undergraduate degrees. We're kind of looking at the whole issue of what is the empty college degree. You know, the empty college degree being sort of this degree that is a quote, unquote useful major, and then a bunch of other stuff in the degree that doesn't really knit together. And a lot of students graduate with that kind of degree. You know, we think this is like a huge part of what drives the national conversation about underemployment and of the value of college right now, and that emptiness being sort of the main problem there. And so with Hacking College, we're trying to tackle this, this question like, how do you actually get to something that's valuable? The term hacking comes from the notion that colleges sort of set up a bunch of rules around, you know, how do you get through? How do you, what do you major in? How do you, how do you fill up the rest of the undergraduate degree? And we're using the metaphor of hacking we're talking about like, how do you, how do you use these different structures that you find in college and then knit them together in a conscious way? How do you, how do you create opportunities and create a program that plays off the strengths that you already bring to college? This is a big part of the hacking metaphor there, coming out of the work of Bruce Schneier, who talks about how hacking is across society. People hack the tax code. People hack regulations, government regulations. People hack their lives in all sorts of ways. And of course, the wealthy hack college in hiring expensive college consultants, in, you know, in lining up opportunities for their children in all sorts of ways. How can we do this for students who don't bring these kinds of resources to the undergraduate experience? Julian Alssid: So Ned, you so in the book, I think you used the term earlier, you described approaching this undergraduate experience as a field of study.  Ned Laff: Yes. Julian Alssid: What does that mean? What exactly do you mean? And how does approaching college with that lens impact their learner experience?  Ned Laff: The interesting thing about using field of study is, I asked students once, can you tell me the difference between your college faculty and your high school faculty, and they couldn't and it was a wonderful experience, because what it meant was basically 90% of what faculty have to offer, what a university has to offer, is invisible. So when you look at faculty, faculty are field of study specialists. They aren't just, I'm a professor of English or I'm a professor of biology, they are I'm a professor of environmental biology, and I'm looking at the migration patterns of whales. And that is looking at it is defining a problem which we call in the book wicked problems, which demand a multi disciplinary approach. And how you approach those wicked problems depends on how you define it. So it's not unusual to hear students come out and say, I just graduated with my degree. I'm at Northwestern University. I actually heard this the other day at the gym. I'm at Northwestern University. I'm graduating, and I have no idea what I'm doing with my degree. I don't know how it adds up, because no one had ever asked them a question like this. I'm going to go into accounting. I have no idea what. Talking about, can you explain that to me? And as soon as you ask for that explanation, whole bunches of things open up. And among those things that open up are all this possibility in what Scott and I call the hidden job market. So the other part of field of study is that it brings an outward looking perspective into how students think inwardly about the college. When they begin to do this, what they realize is there's three basic components to an undergraduate education. When you look at most colleges, right, Gen Ed, the major, and what are you going to do with the rest of the hours, which is almost a third or more of your hours? Sometimes it could add up to 50 hours, because some courses in the gen ed count for the major. Well, when you look at a degree audit, it's except for the basic required courses. It's blank spaces to be filled in. How you fill that in is either going to lead to a profound field, the study for you, where you're using the that thing that you're interested in, your hidden, what we call hidden intellectualism, to guide the way you start looking at the learning opportunities on campus and filling these pieces in so they integrate and they fit together. So Gen Ed links with elective courses, which link with how you select what you want to take from this thing called the major department, and how you begin to identify faculty by their fields of specialty. So for instance, take psychology. There's developmental psychologists, there's social psychologists, there are psychologists that focus on Labor and Industrial Relations. There are cognitive psychologists, neuroscientists, all of those, if, depending on how you're going to look at the problem you want to study, all of those represent a different way of organizing the learning opportunities on campus. How you organize those learning opportunities that starts building out a field of study. But the other thing that's important in doing this is finding out who is doing that thing you want to do, because all of a sudden you walk out into the world, right? And this world, by the way, could be faculty doing their research and they're discovering things that, wow, if I was to do it all over again, I would be doing this for my course selection instead of that, because this is what I'm encountering right now, and students can bring that information back into how they begin to design what their curriculum or their course of study is, and that's the difference. It's an active design process, not from an advisor or a faculty member talking about degree requirements, but from a student designing the pieces of their curriculum. Julian Alssid: Just going back for a minute. I mean, this makes all the great sense and and I think anyone you know, so many of us can hearken back to that faculty or administrator that kind of helped us help the lights go off. But I guess I do wonder, and I don't know, maybe I'll love this one to you, Scott, this requires a bit of a mind shift for a lot of faculty. I mean, I don't think you know, they signed on to be the Career Counselor, the social networking expert, along with the, you know, the content expert and expert instructor. So A, what's your view about that? And B, how are we going to get from here to where you guys think we need to go?  Scott Carlson: I mean, I think what you're asking is sort of what I'm picking up from what you're asking is, you know, an implement, an implementation sort of factor here, like, how does this actually happen on a college campus, right? And so kind of part, you know, what we envision, you know, we wrote Hacking College in this very conversational style that allows anyone to read it and anyone to sort of adopt the practices there. Because, you know, on one hand, people you know, they sort of asked us, do you want after this, this book came out of a story that I wrote for The Chronicle called the crusade against terrible advising, right? And after the article came out, you know, Johns Hopkins Press and others had asked, Do you want to turn this into a book? Do you want to write a book about advising? And we really didn't want to write a book about advising. We wanted to write about these structures that cause students to fall off the path. And in writing the book, we wanted to write it in this accessible style, because we sort of felt that everyone on a campus should be able to read this and then work with the students that they, in particular, have in their orbit. That's how you're going to sort of increase, increase the touches that that students have with people on campus, right? We can't just sort of lay this all on advisors, or lay this all on faculty advisors, and in part of the part of implementing this, part of what we're getting at is that what the colleges can do is they can, they can sort of adopt this as a mind frame at the colleges where everyone is sort of speaking this field of study, language and instructing students how to how to go about this, how to talk to people, how to find these contacts that are going to help instruct them in how to design their undergraduate degree. Now, these can be faculty members, but we're hopeful that when the students do encounter the faculty members, when they are working with them. They're working with the faculty members that share this kind of passion, or this hidden intellectualism, or this area of interest, this place where they're going to have a head start on the conversation, because they're already into what the faculty are talking about. And those faculty members, members then will be motivated to work with those students, because those students are in the area that they're interested in. I mean, a big part of the social capital that we talk about in hacking college comes through cultural capital. You know, the conversation about social capital is everywhere in higher ed right now. It's about who you know, right? But a big point that we're making in hacking college is that what drives the social capital is the cultural capital. It's the stuff that you're bringing as a person to the other person in making this link across interests, hidden intellectualism, obsessions, that kind of thing. So this is, I think, a big key to sort of making these relationships work.  Ned Laff: And another part of it is this is very much the student is agent. So there's a student in doing this, they're creating networks. So it's not like I'm I am dependent on a faculty member. There could be three or four faculty members. There could be somebody in student affairs that they talk to, they go out on what we call this research, investigative inquiry, and start talking to people in the areas that they're interested in, and they're bringing information back there. Then they can sit, perhaps with somebody in an advising office and say, Here, I've got all this information. Now, how do I put the how do these pieces start to come together so that I can graduate under the requirements of a major, right? But design the pieces so it gets me to where I want to go. So it's very much a process of students building out their social capital, building out their cultural capital, learning how to network with people on campus and off campus, right? These are all the skills that everyone says people need, right? But they're doing this to design their undergraduate field of study. So in the process of doing their undergraduate education, all these mystical skills of oral communication and teamwork and stuff, they're all coming together, because what's driving it is the students' hidden intellectualism and their vocational purpose.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, I mean, I really appreciated in the in the book, when you know you had a line, it's not where you go to college, but how you do college that matters. That really stuck out to me. And I think, you know, as as we're thinking about the the social and cultural capital, and you know, one point in the book, you raise this concept of the hidden jobs, and you take it in a slightly different direction than I think we sometimes hear it talked about like it's not just about what's posted on LinkedIn as a job opportunity or not, but really that other definition around like pulling back the curtain of the world of work and helping learners really get an understanding of what are all the different job opportunities and career paths available in what might be. I mean, you, I love the scenario of working in a museum, right, like, but would love to, would love just to hear you talk a little bit more about that and what that, you know, what going down that path, through those hidden jobs, can really unearth for learners.  Ned Laff: You know, this is where students, all of a sudden, everything changes for them. I sent this one to Scott recently because I didn't know this existed. There is a national Egg Board. I mean, isn't that cool? It's it's a national organization, and what they deal with is eggs, the eggs you eat. So that means, when you think about it, they have to have a director, they have to have communications, they have to have organizational structure. There's all these things out here. You will never see the National Egg Board listed in a career services office. But that doesn't mean a student can't access it. So what happens is, everything is fair game. And part of the issue that we need to start thinking about is, we right it. Universities tend to define here's where the jobs are. Instead of listening to students and helping them realize, Oh, you want to do something like spoken word, and you want to help students. You want to help kids, in general, use that in order to build out their self esteem, get on their feet and start moving forward. Well, what major is that called, right? But when you start looking at it, you know, we have Google, type in Google, and all of a sudden, up comes all this information. And will people talk to you? Sometimes you have to tell students that they have to put a time limit on it, because once you get people talking to you about what they love to do, they'll go on and on and on, and that opens up possibilities, plus they didn't help the student network to other people doing similar types of things. So now what happens is the model is sort of like a good dissertation advisor who asks you that question and then says, here's how you go find the answer. Now, go come back and tell me what you're coming back with. And so that's how the process works. So it's faculty, it could be staff, it could be anything you hear on the radio, anything you see on TV, anything you read in a newspaper, a billboard that you see you're in yoga class and hear a conversation. All of that is fair game in this process, and it changes the whole nature of the job market and for students, when all of a sudden they say, oh my god, I just ran into somebody who's doing what I love, right? We tend, we tend to say, follow your passion. That's the line out there, right? But really it's following that hidden intellectualism and vocational purpose. The passion is just the emotive expression of, Oh, my God, this is real. Scott Carlson: One thing I would say is that you know this process that allows students to go out and discover these worlds that are important to them, you know, the Egg Board, or whatever. You know these the world of skiing, the world of anime. You know, it's not just good for the student in discovering something that's out there. I think it's also good. We also think that it's good for the institution. Yes, have you ever heard of the concept of the desire path? You see desire paths when you walk through a city and there's a, sort of a grassy place along a sidewalk, and then you see this sort of like dirt path that goes through the sidewalk to Earth, through the grass to another sidewalk on the other side. It's the people sort of making, this is the shortcut. This is how I want to get there. It's the way that people hack the urban urban infrastructure, in a sense, right? But it also shows others where they can cut across the grass to get to a place faster, right? And eventually, over time, in a lot of instances, the cities will just pave that part because that's where this that's where the people are going. Let's create it. Let's create an actual path there, right? And that's kind of what we're saying. Can happen with the colleges too. The students go out and they discover these worlds, and they're like, oh, I can use this to go to open up the world of eggs through the Egg Board, or I can go into anime, or I can go into museums, or what, what have you. And then the institution starts to discover, oh, these students are leading the way. They are blazing the path. It gives us an opportunity for other students to follow them. And then we can, we can institutionalize that path. We can create a way for students to get there easier, Ned Laff: And it also challenges, it also challenges our traditional way of thinking about things. I have an academic minute that I wrote it was the answer to the Dead Poets Society. Of course, you can study Shakespeare and go to medical school, more than likely you're going to end up being a much more empathetic doctor. But what students begin to discover when they start looking at the 5000 different ways you can actually get into medical school, it allows them to balance out their life. So I've had students who never had that semester of chemistry, physics, math and biology in the same semester because they discovered, wait, this is what's required to get into medical school. But there's other stuff. There is this whole thing of. How does culture affect health care? How do social social factors affect health care? Why is understanding language important? Because language involves not just speaking to somebody. It involves a culture of eating, a culture of behaving, a culture of everything all of there's so many different paths to get into medical school. Why do so many students only hear about one? Right? Because I remember reading an article that was in The Chronicle that people who are trying to defend history were saying, Wow, we have a couple of history majors who are interested in medical school, but they never ask this question. They never lay this out. How does understanding how to do historical research help you take a better patient history, and asking that question changes everything for a student, and allows them to plan things in a way that best fits all the all the gymnastics that are in their life.  Kaitlin LeMoine: I appreciated the use of the term translation chasm in your book, and I think you know whether that's talking about from a more liberal arts major to a more technical job, or, as you're saying, right? What does it look like to think about maybe something, maybe a graduate school opportunity where it's like, Wait, does this relate? And how and what really are those tangible skills, those cross functional skills, just interdisciplinary skills that kind of follow you wherever you go. I think you know is, is invaluable from a learner perspective, especially, you know, as we recognize that people tend to have more than one job, more than one career at this point, right? So like taking that skill and being able to apply it over and over again, and think about, wait a minute, how do these skills translate to this next opportunity, or to this maybe peripheral or tangential opera that might seem peripheral, peripheral, but actually maybe isn't. Scott Carlson: Yeah, and I think, I think that's an interesting point about the translation chasm there, because I think a lot of the students go in thinking like, well, major equals job, right? And so what do you do with history? What do you do with dance? What do you do with you know, art, right? Like, become an artist, become a dancer. You know, like, there's all sorts of ways to think about it under this framing. There's different ways to think about what your pathway can be. But you make a good point. One of the things that we write about in hacking College is the notion that you only gather those skills, and you only really sort of understand their meaning and their applicability if you know why you're sitting in the courses, if you know why you're there, if you know what it's leading to, or how you're sort of applying it, right it's skills. I think the conversation about skills in higher education right now is just so much about like, well, we're going to open these kids' heads, and then we're going to dump the skills in, and they're going to be great, and then somebody will hire them for those skills. Eventually we're going to go to skills based hiring, quote, unquote, right? And, you know, we just think that the whole scene is a lot more complicated than that, and requires a lot more human engagement, yeah, than all of that. It's just not this turnkey, like, let's give people skills and then go from there, right? You know. Ned Laff: Skills are always contextually based Kaitlin LeMoine: And the coaching that underlies what you're talking about. Ned Laff: Yes, and interestingly, I'm taking something from my background. It's a metaphorical step to take the skills that you've learned in one contextual setting, and then begin to apply them in another to see how they apply into other contextual studies. You're seeing these analogic connections. And this is, this is the other power of the field of study approach. Julian Alssid: Yeah, well, it's and it's interesting. We, like Kaitlin, and we talked quite a lot about, you know, that? I mean, it's really about ensuring that each of us has this kind of, you know, good understanding of what we bring to the table, both intellectually interest tech and in the end, the good jobs now, the more we can see from what's emerging here with tech and AI and such as is like, you know, it's like, kind of these jobs require the higher order thinking a good liberal arts program teaches, and the ability to apply yourself. So in a way, what you're talking about is a very organic way of just using this infrastructure that we have to move more in that direction. Ned Laff: Right and building off Gerry Graff's work on "Clueless in Academe", this idea of hidden intellectualism is important when I work with students or when I'm talking to a group of students, I always ask them this question, have you ever gone to a movie with your friend? Yes, and they all say yes. And then I ask them, but did you see the same movie? And then there's a certain line right. There's a certain area where they could say yes, they saw the same movie. But then when they start to get into that interpretive mood that that's not the same movie that everyone's seen. Well, this is the same thing that happens when a student is in a class, when they have clarified their hidden intellectualism, they know they're looking at the contextual nature of the skills and then shaping that through the lens of their hidden intellectualism into the field of study, the problem that they're going after.  Scott Carlson: Julian, I, you know, I would just say too that, like this is one of the things that it's one of the points of Hacking College, but it's also one of the things that we worry about a little bit. You know, Hacking College is, on one hand, really critical of a lot of the structures within, you know, the average four year institution or university, and what they're doing wrong with advising, and what's happening with, you know, the tracks that they're setting up, and how they're shoving students into boxes and all of that. But you know what you're talking about in terms of what we're talking about here, in terms of, how do students actually acquire skills? How do people actually learn to grow into the roles that they eventually occupy. You know, that's really, it's really individualistic and really hard work. You know, it's hard work on the part of the institution, too. And we do worry that, you know, that the national conversation that seeks to simplify this process, that is about like setting up pathways or putting up tracks, or, like, saying it's all about skills based hiring, or it's all about, like, you know, setting up these, these very, you know, rote pathways. You know, we just worry that that's not really going to get us where we want to go as a nation, in terms of a working nation, you know, there has to be this balance between offering people opportunities that are clear and may have clear pathways to them, but also, you know, giving people the opportunity to be entrepreneurial and to express the skills that are already within them and the desires that they have and the worlds that they want to enter. Julian Alssid: Okay, so just riffing off of that. Scott, one of the questions we like, always like to ask on each of our episodes is, you know, what can our what steps can our audience take to become forces, in this case, in hacking college? And you know, our audience is more the people who are trying to run these institutions and teach students and interested to hear your take on that, you guys. Scott Carlson: I, I'll start, and then I'll let Ned take it from there. But like one of the one of the things that Ned and I have thought about writing for The Chronicle as a follow up to hacking College, is as a story that says it's right in front of you. The answers are right in front of you, because there are so many times when we've gone to colleges and the institutions just are not even doing the basic work of getting off of campus, talking to the various constituents that are off campus, really engaging the students on what they really, really want there, that there are sort of unfilled internship positions out there, that you know, that the college is lined up, but no one's bothered to like connect the students to it. I think some of the work that has to be done right now is really low hanging fruit, and it is really just about getting people out of the out of the confined space of the campus, and getting them off campus and to discover what's out there, and to start to build these partnerships that are really fun. I think the other piece of it too is to try to engage the student around what we're talking about in the book, in terms of playing off of their playing off of what drives them. I mean, we're in a position right now where, you know, we've been talking about this for a couple of weeks, where we just have no idea where the world is going. This is where we end hacking college that you know, Zach Stein, he's this educational futurist that we quote in the last chapter says, you know, we just, even the elders, have no idea where the country is going, where education is going, what form it will take. So maybe we need a little less control around that, and we need to start to embrace this hacking concept that allows us to open it up a little bit more and maybe experiment a little bit more. That's what's coming. I think for higher education. Ned Laff: There's something very deliberate also in what we did with Hacking College, we focused on, Hi, here's a school that anyone can get into. Here's a community college that anyone can get into. These are not Ivy League colleges. They're not the high end flagship institutions, and all of a sudden they become hidden dream schools, because what students begin to see is that these, all these schools, have a wealth of learning opportunities on their campuses if they can see it well, the flip side is for college administrators to be able to see exactly the same thing when students begin to see when they begin to look at faculty as field of study specialists, the whole nature of the college changes. Everything changes. Well, if we can get faculty and administrators and staff to see the same thing, then what you begin to realize is, gosh, go wander into some of the offices or some of the labs on a community college, and all of a sudden you're going to see some of the craziest stuff going on, right? So there's this wealth out there. So here's all this wealth, and here's this thing of what our college is going to do to try to attract students or to show students that there's value and it's right in front of you. Change this is interesting, right? Change the conversations, right? So the last time I looked, and trust me, I look at this all the time, there is no budget line in change the kinds of conversations right. Change the conversations the students see themselves differently. They see the campus differently. They see all the opportunities around their campus differently. All of a sudden it's a wealth of opportunities. The other thing that's interesting is this, people will always ask me, why will these people that we send students out to talk to? We make them make these phone calls, this research, investigative interview? Why would people talk to them, and I tell them straight up, because they're all frustrated parents whose kids never listen to them, and they've got so much to share, and they really want to share it. And so the hack is, I'm not going through an HR gate. I'm going around the gate. I've taken a desired path. I'm connecting, I'm matching my interest with somebody else's interest, which then brings passion to passion, and all sorts of stuff begins to blow up. It's great. Kaitlin LeMoine: So I feel like we could have, we could have a full day's worth of conversation about this book, and I, and I hate to take us to the last question of our conversation today, but, but I will so you know, we've really enjoyed this conversation and really appreciate so many of you know so many of the topics that you raised and in this book. As we close out today, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow the work that you're doing? And Scott, you know, you mentioned the follow up piece you might be writing, and how can our listeners kind of remain in the loop?  Scott Carlson: I mean, I think, first of all, you know, just for me, I'll continue to write for The Chronicle. I have a column called The Edge, where we'll be hitting these topics on a regular basis, and we'll be out there on social media. I mean, social media is kind of a disaster these days, but I am on LinkedIn, so I'll be posting on that. And, you know, we'll just continue to have this. We're just going to continue to push this. I think, given the way that people are talking about college right now. We want to change that conversation. And we want to change the conversation around, what does it mean to be connected to the workforce? Yeah, that's been part of it. Ned Laff: So I'm on LinkedIn. Contact us. You know, we will gladly sit down, set up a time. We could do a Zoom talk. There's whole bunches of different ways to do this, and this is important for people in universities to understand you can take what already exists that you're already using, reshape the insides of it, and all of a sudden a master in college class becomes a class in mastering how to hack the college right same amount of time you already have it scheduled. You're not increasing any revenue. But the important thing is the effects on the students will be different. And so it's easy to do. It's like anyone who would like to continue the conversations just, just contact well. Julian Alssid: And I'm sure people will definitely want to continue the conversation. We're so excited to have been at the front end of this dialogue you're starting, I hope others will read the book I'm about 52% of the way through, judging by my bookmark here to the left. But thank you both so so much for joining us today. Good luck with this, and you know, we too look forward to being part of this conversation. Scott Carlson: Thank you both.  Ned Laff: Thanks so much.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify, please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Shawn VanDerziel, President and CEO of the  National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE), kicks off a special three-part series exploring the crucial intersection of higher education and industry. Drawing on his extensive experience in HR and recruitment, VanDerziel discusses how the evolving economy is reshaping entry-level hiring practices and the growing importance of skills-based recruitment. He highlights the challenges facing both employers and higher education institutions, including the "language gap" that prevents students from effectively articulating their skills to employers. VanDerziel also examines how AI is transforming both recruitment strategies and career services, drawing employers back to campus recruiting while offering new opportunities for understaffed career offices. The conversation offers practical strategies for helping students translate their academic experiences into workplace-relevant skills, ultimately strengthening the vital bridge between post-secondary education and meaningful employment. Transcript Kaitlin LeMoine: Hi all, hope you all are doing well. As we plan for our next podcast season, we're posting a few Work Forces Rewinds featuring some of the insightful conversations you may have missed from this past season. We hope you enjoy them as much as we did. While we'll be back with new episodes in the coming weeks, we want to pause to express our appreciation for you, our listeners. Julian and I are so grateful for your feedback, your likes and shares and overall engagement with the Work Forces podcast. Your encouragement and perspectives continue to shape the conversations we hold on the podcast and inform how we approach our consulting efforts as well. We hope you enjoy these Rewind episodes and we'll be back to kick off our next season soon. So here we go. Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Julian. We've spent a lot of time on this podcast exploring the connections between higher ed and industry. Among many topics, we've discussed experiential learning, skills based education, business, higher ed partnerships and the impact of AI. We've examined how colleges are continuing to adapt to workforce needs and how innovative collaborations are aligning academic programs with evolving career opportunities.  Julian Alssid: That's right Kaitlin, and we're excited to share that we've partnered with the National Association of Colleges and Employers, or NACE, for a special three part mini series focused on a really critical piece of the higher ed-industry connection.  Kaitlin LeMoine: For our listeners who may be less familiar, NACE is the leading professional organization for career services and university relations and recruiting professionals. As described on their website, NACE empowers and connects the community of professionals who support, develop, and employ the college educated workforce.  Julian Alssid: This series will examine the work happening at the crucial intersection of learning and work in three parts. First, we'll discuss the broader landscape surrounding college career services and recruiting. Then we'll explore NACE's latest research, including projections for the class of 2025, and finally, we'll look at how leading colleges and employers are putting these insights into practice. To kick off today's conversation, we're honored to be joined by Shawn VanDerziel, President and CEO of NACE.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Shawn, thanks so much for joining us today. We're excited to have you on this podcast.  Shawn VanDerziel: Well, thanks for inviting us. I'm excited to be here with you all.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So, Shawn, as we jump in today, can you please give us some background on yourself and what led you to NACE.  Shawn VanDerziel: Sure I've had a windy road to my current position. I'm going to start back way back into college and move quickly through my career, so you can see the perspective by which I approach my work. I graduated from a large state school with my undergraduate and had no idea what I was going to do with my degree, and I had an opportunity to move to Chicago afterwards, which was a great move for me. And I found my first position working in college admissions, student enrollment, which was a natural for me, because in college, I was one of those overly involved students. I was a first generation student, so I didn't have the same resources as as many others may have had, and and wasn't quite sure how to approach my job search, etc, but I knew some things from my college experience, such as like giving campus tours, working with the admissions office, leading student groups, and I found my way into admissions. It was a great way to start my career. Worked my way up, and I got really burned out, and but what can I do? I was so tired of traveling all the time, being up until 10 o'clock at night, going to college fairs at high schools, all of those things. And so I thought, how can I transition these skills into something else? And I thought about recruiting, recruiting employees. So I was recruiting students. Why couldn't I recruit employees? And I found an organization that was really interested in me because of my connection to college students. They were very interested in connecting with college students to their employment opportunities. It was the first time that an outsourced service. Well, I should say, Fortune 500 company, utilized a outsourced service to fully take over the recruitment function. And so I worked for a company called Norrell Corporation, which was a billion dollar staffing company at the time, and we took over Bank of America's recruiting function for their Midwest region because they were expanding banks. So they were opening over 100 banks throughout the Chicagoland area in a period of about a year and a half. And I started as the recruitment manager, hiring all of these folks who are going to work in these banks, particularly through their management trainee programs and for tellers. And they wanted college students to be involved with that. So I was back on college campuses, looking for those students. Well again, I got really burned out, and I was like, Oh my gosh, this is the i being an outsourced service is a no joke kind of job. And I thought again, like, how can I transition this? And I already had the recruitment experience. I had always wanted to work at a museum, and finally, I had the skill to actually do something in a museum, and that was to work in a human resources office within a museum which is very niche, but I found a job and that I could apply for, and I actually got the job. And so I spent almost 25 years at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, which is one of the world's largest natural history museums, and I worked my way up from a human resources rep doing recruitment and employee relations to becoming the Chief Human Resources Officer, Chief of Staff. And I oversaw lots of different departments over time, including our IT department, our education department, marketing for a short while, and also oversaw our Board of Trustees and the functions related to that. While I was at The Field Museum, I built a really large internship program that included over 200 interns every summer. And that experience led me to NACE, the National Association of Colleges and Employers as a volunteer, I became a volunteer leader and eventually the Chair of the Board of NACE. Over a decade ago, when the executive director of NACE was about to retire, I became a part of the search process, and was lucky enough to actually be offered the job at the end of that executive search process. So five years ago, I started as this President and CEO of NACE, and am so delighted to be representing this organization to the world.  Julian Alssid: Always so great to hear peoples' origin stories. And so tell us a bit more about NACE. So give us an overview, if you will, Shawn and and then the role that nice really plays at the sort of intersection of higher ed and industry. Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, simply put, that's exactly what we do. We bridge post secondary education to employment. We're all about outcomes and equitable outcomes for all students who pursue post secondary education. What that means on a day to day basis is that we are a membership association that represents folks who work on college campuses, mostly in the career services offices. So we represent every type of college and university, small, large, private, public, community college, four year, you name it, that's about two thirds of our members. One third of our members are the employers who go into college campuses and recruit college students for employment opportunities, for full time internships, co ops, apprenticeships, you name it, the full gambit of opportunities. We represent close to 3,000 organizations, and over 17,000 almost 18,000 individuals are a part of the association.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Wow. Yeah. So this is, this is an extensive operation you have going on, and I would imagine, thank you. Thank you for the background you provided, because it just feels like, wow, you're drawing on, I'm sure, all the different skills and experiences gathered over the years, especially both on the college recruitment side and then on the employer recruitment side as well. It's quite striking.  Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, it's a lot of fun. And one of the things that on important work, really important work. And we're not insular, so meaning, like we just don't do things for our members. We do things for the public at large, so that they understand what's happening with the outcomes of students. So at the center of everything that we do is research. We're a knowledge based organization, so we're able to study the employment market from a variety of perspectives. We can see what's happening at college campuses to prepare students for employment opportunities. We can talk with students about what they're looking for in their jobs and how they're being prepared for jobs in their careers, and we talk to the employers about what they're looking for and how those other two pieces need to evolve to meet the growing and demanding needs of the workplace of the future.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Amazing. So with all that being said, given the rapidly shifting environment that we're currently operating in this very dynamic space, we'd love to dive into a couple of different areas that you just that you mentioned, and that NACE raised recently as part of a recent more environmental scan. I believe you posted about it on LinkedIn not too long ago. So one question we have is, first, how do you see the current economy and economic outlook reshaping how employers are hiring entry level talent, and how, with a different lens how colleges are preparing those learners for success as well.  Shawn VanDerziel: What we know right now is that the employment market is contracting so there are fewer opportunities for college graduates to join the workforce as compared to, let's say, two or three years ago, and that is from general full time employment all the way through to internships. With that we also know that employers are continually telling us that there's a gap between what college students offer and what they're looking to hire. So they have, they have made a bunch of shifts in their hiring and how they hire, which is no different than the general employment landscape. So we keep hearing about skills based hiring. Well, this has caused employers, particularly with early talent to really focus on that skills based hiring. So what they're saying is, is that in the old days, they would look at students who had a particular major, and they would look to see what their grade point average is as a starting place for the hiring process, and today, they're telling us for some jobs, we will do that, particularly highly technical jobs that require technical skills. So if you're going to be an engineer, Well, you certainly don't want someone working on your airplane who didn't get good grades, right? So you want to know that they're the top of their class because they have the knowledge to do the job. So they might still be screened by GPA. But if I'm looking for someone who's going into a management trainee program of some sort, that's more of a generalist or etc, I might think a little bit more broadly. I don't necessarily have to have someone who has the highest GPA. What I want is someone who has the skills and competencies to do the job. So how am I then going to find that person? Well, I have to substitute something in there to screen that person by we know from talking to employers that work experiences in general are very important to them. So anytime a student can demonstrate work experiences, and they can list what they actually gained in skill or competency in that work is super important, and they look for internship experience, either internship experience with them as their that student's employer, or they look for industry experience. So did the person have an internship in something that's closely aligned? And those are the students that they're saying they probably have the skills to do the job. They're also, of course, doing things like keyword searches and and using AI as part of part of the recruitment process. But they're really trying to dig down to find students who are going to succeed long term, and that's also one of the reasons that they invest so much money, particularly large companies, into internship programs, because we know that internship programs are the number one return on investment for employers from a recruitment perspective, the cost value is there for them. They know that they can convert at least 50% of those interns into being full time employees. They know that when they hire that student who starts as an intern, they're going to be with the company, more likely a year later and more likely five years later. We know that we've got that that data data to back it up, so the return on investment is really there. So we're finding more and more interest from employers and and partnering with schools to make sure their internship programs are solid. We're also finding that they are returning to campus, so they've been doing hiring on the web for quite some time. They've been focusing on it virtually, but they're also finding a need to get back in person so that they can weed through some of the talent a little bit more quickly.  Julian Alssid: That's so interesting that they're they're coming back.  Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, absolutely. And AI has a lot to do with that, and we certainly can talk more about AI and how that's impacting everything, but there's an impersonalization that's happening, and there really is a business case for for getting back on campus and finding that talent.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, so before we go into AI, which definitely we want to hear more about, it's all the rage, as you may have heard, interested to talk a little bit more about the skills based practices, because there's been some written about how...  The Burning Glass Institute and Harvard Center on Workforce wrote a piece a few months ago, which, of course, could be ancient history at this point, that companies were not picking up so much on on skills based practices. And so I'm interested to hear your take on that. You know, I get it with respect to the jobs where they're they are looking for skills. But how is it? Are they integrating this more broadly into their organizations? Are you seeing that?  Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, it's a really interesting question. So employers in our surveying do say that they, the majority of them, are doing some type of skills based hiring. Where they are doing it is either through keyword searches as an example, in screening the resumes through automated systems or the the other bulk is through behavioral based interviewing questions. So when a student actually lands an interview, being able to talk through with them what they have actually accomplished, and what they have the ability to be able to do based upon the skills and competencies that they've gained. And so by providing those concrete examples, they're able to kind of dig through that. But it also goes back to what I was mentioning just a few minutes ago, which is around they're kind of substituting when they say skills based hiring, what we say academically doesn't necessarily match what employers are doing logistically. There's always this gap between industry and higher ed and the language. And this is a really good example. And so when, from an academic perspective, we think of skill, we think, well, gosh, you're looking for someone who has great verbal speaking skills, right? You can do public speaking. Okay, great. So then, how do you screen for that? Well, what are those employers going to do to find that they're not going to put a test in place to have every candidate come through and do some kind of speech, right? That's not what they're going to do to get to that skill. What they're going to do is they're going to look on that resume and say, oh, gosh, did this student have an internship? And in that internship, did they use their verbal communication skills? Did they designate that on there? So if that skill is not listed, the employer isn't going to find it as a starting place, and then they're not going to be able to dig deeper on it when they get them into an interview. So this comes full circle to what's happening on campuses and preparing students to be career ready, and bridging that employment because we have an onus in higher education with these students to help them to articulate their skills and their competencies in a way that an employer can translate it and employers speak a totally different language. They want the shortcut. They want to get to the candidate in the fastest way possible. So they are going to put any mechanism in place to do that. And so it behooves us to help those graduates to be able to articulate it in every which way, all of the experiences that they have, right? So it doesn't even have they can come from unexpected ways. It could come from student activities. It could come from work study. It could come from a whole variety of places that a student may have obtained skills and competencies throughout their college career.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, it's really interesting to hear you talk about the language gap that exists Shawn and kind and the difference between, you know, maybe how, on the academic side, we describe a skill, and then the shortcut language that employers might use, I feel like that's, that's an area that we've I feel like has, you know, it's been around for for so long now, and it feels like there's just, there's more and more great work happening around how to close that gap. And you know, I think that if we're going to turn to the conversation of AI, it seems like there's some really interesting work there that might be able to support some of the closing of those gaps. But then there's also some new challenges that emerge as well. So would love to transition over to talk a little bit more about AI and how what you're seeing from the perspective of both use on the employer side with respect to recruitment and hiring, and also when we think about career services and preparing learners for really bridging that gap between post secondary and employer. Where is AI, you know, used well, where is it less effective? And you know, where do we still have work to do?  Shawn VanDerziel: I'll start with the employers. So as I mentioned earlier, employers are using it for screening, most definitely, and they've been doing that for a long time, using various AI technologies to help them  screen resumes. But an interesting thing is happening right now, which is because of the explosion of AI, there are some employers that are seeing an explosion of resumes hitting them, and because of these bots that are out there, and there are fake candidates that are hitting employers by the hundreds of thousands. And there are job seekers who are literally sending out thousands of resumes at a time. And so when that happens, an employer is put at a disadvantage, because now they have for one opening, or let's call it, two openings, they have 10,000 candidates. So there's a real challenge there for them to screen all of those resumes and to really find the top candidates to come out of that and to really give the right people the right chance, right and so it's a tough predicament to be in, and that's one of the reasons employers are actually thinking about going back to campus, in larger numbers coming up here because they started to deploy a strategy over the last few years of virtual recruiting, which was successful for them, where they were more agnostic about the campus by which they were recruiting from. And now, because of the influx of AI, they are rethinking this, and they're saying, hey, I need to get to candidates differently. I need to know that they're legit candidates. I need to be able to talk to some people and and so I may actually go back and do target schools again, and go on to select school campuses, which then, of course, creates more competition among the schools. So it's this vicious circle that ends up happening, but again, those employers are looking to get to the candidates in the most efficient and effective way possible. On the college side, AI has great promise, particularly for those understaffed career services offices, which are the majority of career service offices on campuses these days. If we're about career outcomes, we need to be investing in career services. But unfortunately, the investment hasn't been made on most campuses. AI can play a really pivotal role in helping to expand the services that a college can offer. It's not going to solve the issues, but more students can be reached, maybe more efficiently. So bots can be deployed to answer basic questions, the staff can direct the learners to resources that are can help them write their resumes, figure out other types of industries or jobs that the student may have the skills to do, to do career exploration, the list goes on and on, and then the career services staff can really dive deep with students in quality work, in one on one work, doing really meaningful work, and helping to set that student up for career success, around the articulation of skills, around targeting of certain employers, thinking broadly about the application of what they've learned, and so it could make a difference long term. But of course, we're at the beginning of it all.  Kaitlin LeMoine: It's interesting to hear you talk about how the use of AI in the in career services offices can actually get career services professionals back to like, maybe like, the core of their work, and what's the most important to their work. And it's interesting. Julian, I feel like we're we've heard some of that about like, well, what are the benefits? What are the benefits of AI? And this is a great example of one space where it's like, maybe it means that the professionals themselves can get back to like what is most critical, and then some of the other, perhaps time consuming, but maybe less impactful work can be automated or supported in other ways. I find that really interesting. And then just the one other thing I wanted to mention is, I think it's, it's really interesting to hear like, it's like, there's progress there, and then it's interesting to hear on the employer side, almost a return to previous practice. And what is that, you know, what does it look like to adjust their like hiring practices now, with this new reality of, you know, kind of endless numbers of resumes and trying to determine what's real and what's not, and how to really assess the skills and abilities of applicants. Really, some really interesting tensions there.  Shawn VanDerziel: That's right. One of the things that we're not finding, though, is that students are getting the AI experiences they need to prepare them. So that's yet another dimension that we need higher education working on with students, but we also need the employers. We found in one of our research pieces last year that very few students, less than 10% actually were asked to use AI skills in their internship, which is so surprising, because you would think that companies who are saying there's a future with AI that this entry level group of folks coming into their company could help them to explore it.  Could help to experiment with it. Could bring these new skills to them, yet the students themselves didn't use the technology when they were in their internship, so I hope to see that change as well.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, so we really are at the beginning, and as you said, Shawn, of so much of this, and I guess for our audience, which kind of represents both sides of this, as well as the providers, the companies that are also trying to support this work, what are some practical steps that educators, employers and folks who want to work with, you know them, can take to really design the kind of nimble and adaptable, you know, skills focused education and some of the kind of, you know, exemplar recruitment practices you're talking about   Shawn VanDerziel: As you mentioned, there are some really practical things that can be done that are super simple, and that's thinking about a learner holistically when they come into a college or university, and all of the touch points that they have and all of the experiences that They might go through from the curriculum in the classroom, the projects that they do in the classroom, the student activities, the work study, the part time jobs, the list goes on and on that these are all learning experiences that we know add value to the college graduate experience and why college graduates are so valuable to the future of work. However, these learners aren't able to articulate all of those experiences to translate them to the work world. That's a problem. So they don't give themselves credit for that student activity that they just participated in, that classroom project that they did, where they were the leader of their group, where they analyzed all kinds of data to get to an answer or something, where they did a classroom presentation and had to articulate the results of it, where they then and had to work in a team and collaborate with a team of folks that were difficult to work with because they came from all over, all different disciplines, etc, etc, right? So, like, that's one example where skills and competencies were built, yet students aren't taking credit for it, and the reasons that they're not taking credit for it, for what how that applies to the work world, is that we're not helping them to make that connection, that it is real world, what they just did. And so that's a simple example of just taking the step with these learners to help them to understand how what they just did applies to the world of work. It may seem elementary, but it's needed, and it's going to make a huge difference in these students lives. And then ta da, the employers see it, right, and then they hear it, they're more quick, able to quickly identify that these students actually do have the skills and the competencies to do the job that they're looking to fill.  Julian Alssid: You're getting right at that very basic translation language problem we've been talking about.  Shawn VanDerziel: That's exactly right.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thanks so much for joining us in today's conversation. Shawn, this has been really fascinating, and really appreciate you taking on a couple of really big, big questions with lots of nuance embedded in them. So as we close out today's conversation, how can our listeners learn more about you, about NACE, and continue to follow your great work?  Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, there are a number of ways. The first thing I would suggest is that you follow us on LinkedIn. So look up National Association of Colleges and Employers, and we post regularly, like every day, multiple times a day, statistics, interesting tidbits related to all of this work that everyone can join in on. So even just to be a lurker, that is a great place to hear what's happening in this college to career pipeline. I would also invite you to if you belong to a university or college, to see if you already have a membership with NACE, and if there's a possibility of you being added to the membership role so you're regularly kept up to date. But certainly go to our website at naceweb.org. And we have a ton of stuff there for free, for everybody, again, for the general public to be able to understand what's happening in this world, because we see that as our job to strengthen employment outcomes for all learners well.  Julian Alssid: Thank you so much for joining us, Shawn and and we look forward to continuing with this conversation with your colleagues and taking deeper and deeper. Really appreciate you taking this on.  Shawn VanDerziel: It's been so great having this conversation with you all, and happy to come back anytime.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. Thank you so much. We really appreciate it. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Jean Eddy, President & CEO of American Student Assistance (ASA), discusses how middle and high school students can develop career awareness and gain meaningful workplace experiences before college. Drawing on research showing middle school as the optimal window for career exploration, Eddy details ASA's digital platform approach, which reaches 15 million students through engaging, mobile-based tools that help them discover interests and connect to potential career paths. She emphasizes the critical "testing and trying" phase where students need hands-on experiences, highlighting ASA's grant-making initiatives that fund intermediary organizations bridging gaps between schools and employers. The conversation explores scaling these efforts through policy engagement and community buy-in, with Eddy advocating for making career exploration an integral part of education rather than a disconnected add-on for teachers while offering practical collaboration strategies for all stakeholders to help students find paths that "make their hearts sing." Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. We've spent much of our time on this podcast exploring learning and career pathways, especially for college students and adults, and while those conversations are important, we also know that it helps learners when they begin a process of career exploration much earlier on in their academic journeys. By the time someone gets to college, it can often be too late for foundational career exploration. We need to help K-12 learners develop an awareness and curiosity of various career options, get them age appropriate experience and help them link their academic interests to the world of work.  Julian Alssid: That's right, Kaitlin, and it's something we both know firsthand. We both started our careers in innovative high schools, where we each designed project based and experiential learning opportunities intentionally integrated with internships and real world experiences. We so, you know, we understand the complexities of this work, particularly figuring out the right level of exposure to workplace skills and experiences for young people, you know, how do we best help them explore, gain experience, build social capital and discover their likes and dislikes?  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, it is about developing the skills and awareness learners need to navigate the world of work and thinking about practical implementation. It's about working with employers who can meaningfully support this process, and about providing educators with the time and creative space to make these integrated learning experiences happen.  Julian Alssid: This is a complex topic to unpack, and that's why we're so pleased to have Jean Eddie with us today as President & CEO of American student assistance, or ASA, she's leading the charge in changing how kids learn about careers and prepare for their futures. Jean is an accomplished leader with over 30 years of experience in higher ed, and has held leadership positions at Rhode Island School of Design, Brandeis University, and Northeastern University. She's a nationally recognized speaker and subject matter expert, cited frequently in major publications and a contributor to forbes.com Jean is deeply committed to student success and is the author of crisis proofing today's learners, and co host of The One Question Podcast with Michael Horn, who was a recent guest on Work Forces. Jean, we're looking forward to discussing ASA's innovative approaches to career readiness for middle and high school students, and how you're reaching them in new and novel ways. Welcome to Work Forces. Jean Eddy: So happy to be here, looking forward to the conversation. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, so are we Jean. It's such a pleasure to be with you today. So as we dive into today's conversation, can you please tell us more about your background and what led you to ASA?  Jean Eddy: What is interesting is I met a colleague this morning for breakfast, quite early, and I worked with that person at one of the colleges that you mentioned. We were talking about the fact that we worked with a lot of young people who are on a college campus, and they really didn't know why they were there. And my colleague was basically saying that he oftentimes felt as though he was taking care of young people who were really not they couldn't find their own way. And I would have to say it reminded me of my own journey. I was in high school, and no one approached me about what was next. Never talked about it, never got prepared for it, etc. And if it weren't for the fact that I ended up, after leaving high school, going to a community college, I was lucky, you know, I met people who were interested in me and wanted to kind of show me some way or some path. Who knows where I'd be right now. But I guess, you know, I ended up in higher education because I was so taken with my own experience at a community college. And I worked in higher ed, as you said, for a number of years, but I worked with a lot of young people who really didn't know why they were in college, and I would say that some of them really should have taken another path, and instead, went on to college, spent an awful lot of money that they didn't need to spend, and then ended up with quite a bit of debt that they had to repay somehow, some way. So fast forward now to ASA. I became involved with ASA because ASA is a federal guarantor, and as a person who worked in higher ed I was on the board of ASA for a number of years. And why, why I was interested in ASA is because of the fact. They were really committed to helping young people. It was a very personal relationship, which with a lot of guarantors. It was not but at ASA, it was. And I stayed committed because I was so interested in how they interacted with students. When I was asked to become the CEO here, which was eight years ago now, we were talking about how we could think about working with young people before a problem arose. What we were doing was basically trying to put a band aid on something at the end of the day, rather than getting in front of the problem to see what we could do about that. So we did an awful lot of research and found out that the best time to really talk about careers was in middle school, and that seems kind of young, you know, sixth grade, seventh grade, but what we found was is that kids who are in that age bracket are really open to exploration. They aren't hardwired that they want to do this or they want to do that, and furthermore, their friends haven't made such a huge impact on them that they don't they were willing to go and find their own way. So we then did research about, how do we interact with these young people? What's the best way to do that? And we tried a number of things, but at the end of the day, what we found was we needed to kids meet kids where they are, and that's on a mobile device that's on their cell phone. So like it or not, 97% of the kids who are between 13 and 18 year old, 18 years old, have a cell phone. And so we created mobile, friendly programs that would allow young people to, first off, go out and have fun. Because to me, learning is all about fun. Let's start with that. It doesn't need to be something that's imposed and sometimes treacherous. It's rather what can be fun. So the first thing we developed was something that allowed a young person to have fun, but to basically do puzzles and games, which actually came up with kind of an indicator of things that somebody was good at, but moreover what they liked to do. And then we showed them all kinds of ways to be able to get to that in a successful career. And it's not to say at someone who's in the sixth or seventh grade is saying I'm going to be an X, but rather, I'm interested in these things. And let's see all the possibilities for if you're interested in this, what is possible. And then we went on to build more programs that allowed kids to test and try, which is really key here, testing and trying, having them figure out, maybe I like this, but is there some aspect of it that I really can't do or I don't want to do? And so when we develop these programs, testing and trying, really came in in high school, and the reason for that is by the time students leave high school. We want them to have a plan. And so it's not that again, that they have a road that's absolutely mapped out, but rather, this is the this is the path I can take to see what might come of this, to see what might come with what I love to do with what I'm good at. And can I be able to relate this to that job, that career, that pathway? Julian Alssid: Great to hear the bit about your journey and and the genesis of ASA. So. So now, what are the Could you give us an overview where you are now at ASA with the types of initiatives that you're focused on, and what are the key problems that you know you're looking to, the key challenges or problems you're looking to solve. Jean Eddy: So, you know, the initiatives that we are working on currently, you know, I mentioned the digital we have four digital programs which really bring students from the discovery phase right on through the testing and trying, you know, getting a mentor, getting an apprenticeship, understanding how to be able to get ready for to dress for success, all those kinds of things. There are many, many things kids can do there. We have about 15 million kids on our platforms at any given time. They're between 13 and 18 years old. But in addition to that, we also work with schools, school districts and states who are interested in infusing this kind of a career exploration into their into their curriculum. The biggest one I always talk about is Delaware. Delaware is the nice sized state you can get your arms around it. So we worked with a couple of other funders to basically put career exploration into middle schools in Delaware, so every kid in Delaware has an opportunity to do this kind of career exploration. But I think the biggest challenge we have is the next step is the testing and trying. Because I would have to say, I. So we need employers to be able to help us do that. But any employer will tell you, and I've talked with many, they don't have the infrastructure to be able to provide that, and sometimes they are. They are quite hesitant to get into this, because, again, they don't have the staff, they don't have the know how, and they cannot figure out how to connect with the school district with a system. So a lot of our initiatives are now working with intermediaries places who basically go in and they take care of the things that need to happen at the high school and things that need to happen with the employer, and we do a lot of funding in those respects. My favorite is the caps network. They are national, and they basically give they work with employers and they work with schools to be able to have kids have first hand experiences in how a career could actually map out in a given field. They are beyond impressive. I could talk about them all day, but there are many of them. There are also states who get involved in this, and I will pick on Rhode Island native Rhode Islander, we've worked with skills for Rhode Island for a number of years. They are great intermediaries in basically bringing employers and schools together to provide apprenticeships and internships for young people to test and try. So I think that that is, that is, I'm going to say next big Frontier, we need more opportunities to connect employers and schools in a way that makes sense, and it actually it works for everybody. Kaitlin LeMoine: That last point, you just ended on Jean right? I feel like that's where the rubber meets the road. And all of this work is like, how to make these, these relationships happen? What are you I know, you know you mentioned the intermediary work. What are some of the best practices, or like strategies that you know that are working well to bridge those gaps? Because I think that for so many you know whether, whether it's actually higher ed institutions, K 12 institutions, employers. It's about like, how do we bridge those worlds and in a scalable way?  Jean Eddy: So, I think that there are a few things, getting the word out is incredibly important, thought leadership and getting people to understand or or be able to see the kinds of opportunities that are available. But moreover, the funding that is available. There are a lot of programs out there right now, and we participate in some of these funds, which basically back financially, back opportunities for employers and schools to be able to come together and do this kind of work. And one thing I didn't mention before is the amount of grant making we do, and the grant making we do has everything to do with those kinds of opportunities. Historically, we've given up between $10 and $20 million a year, and it is to fund those kind of opportunities where they have not existed before, or to grow networks that you know have started off but have not how to reach across the country, because what we're trying to do is impact kids everywhere. You know, not only in the places that I think, with the northeast, we have so many colleges and universities, we are so focused on kind of these connections, but there are parts of the country where that's not the case, and particularly in the middle of the country. You know, it's really up to us to do a better job in connecting those intermediaries who work in those places to provide opportunities for young people who otherwise are thinking, Okay, what do I do next? You know, what are my opportunities? And they're not as I would not say that there's not a rich as rich of an offering as there could be, because kids just don't know.  Julian Alssid: So I get the scaling with, you know, your the digital stuff, and how that you know you've been able to reach so many young people directly, I guess my big question is, with the work, with the intermediaries, or the sort of the partnerships, how does that scale? And how do you ensure that it can live beyond the life of your grants? Like, how does this get baked in to what communities do, what educators do, what employers do, and then, how do you scale that? Jean Eddy: You know, we worked with the state of Massachusetts, and we funded a program that basically put pathways into high schools. It was one of Governor Baker's big initiatives and part of his legacy, I would have to say, the idea in doing some of these things. And we did it in Delaware as well. We did it in Rhode Island. As you start to fund these programs, you do it with the hope that you're working with policy makers who are going to encourage the state legislature to put it in the budget and have it move forward. And that has happened in every single one of these cases, I would have to say you have to have buy in, not only from the intermediary and the school and the employer, but you also need buy in with policy makers, because if they don't believe this. Yes, and they don't see, I'm going to say a road map for a state prospering. It's not going to go anyplace. But again, in the state of Massachusetts, we have an enormous shortage in the trades, construction, tech, skill trades, and we worked with the workforce council here to try and develop programs that would allow us to be able to, I'm going to say, start the pipeline for the jobs that we cannot fill and and that, I think, is really it's a problem that we have across the country. We have so many unfilled jobs right now, and I do believe that half the reason why we have that is because young people are not aware of those jobs, and we're not doing the best, the best work we could possibly do, in making sure they know it, but moreover, that they could try those things and find that they could fall in love with something that they didn't even know was existing.  Julian Alssid: Interestingly, we have been working in Massachusetts on the very topic, actually, with the community college and focused on manufacturing. And it's incredible the opportunities that are going wanting because kids and their families know nothing about these roles and the paths associated.  Jean Eddy: You know, just this morning, I was listening, I think it was on NPR, they were talking about the fact that there are wait lists for kids in technical high schools, and that they are trying to now impose a lottery system to let young people in, just that is such a telling update on on what is happening in this state. But moreover, in this country, we should be thinking about, how do we integrate the aspects of those vocational high schools into all of our high schools to give kids an opportunity. And I'm not saying that there aren't high schools who do that, because there are, but it usually requires either a principal or a super superintendent who has that drive and that feeling in their gut that this is what has to happen, and then they make it happen. We need more of that.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, and that combination of both of the leadership, and then, as you mentioned earlier, Gene, the financial backing as well, right to, like, especially for some of the more technical programs that require a lot of equipment and, like, lab space, right? I mean, like, the infrastructure required in some cases is is more significant than others. But like, that's another huge factor in this whole effort. One thing that I find really fascinating about the different digital solutions that ASA has built is it seems like it's a pretty low lift for schools to implement and for learners to engage with I'm curious, how do what's the split? I guess, that you see across like learners who engage with these tools on their own as individual users, versus who are introduced through a classroom like experience like, how do learners come to these materials? Maybe individually? How do they find that? Jean Eddy: So I would say, by and large, young people come to us directly. We have, obviously, connections with teachers, with superintendents, etc. And many will use our products as a way to have a hybrid experience. As far as career exploration is concerned, they are using it for that purpose. So they're basically saying, Go out to asa.org, look at this, look at that, etc. But by and large, most of it is coming from kids who come directly to us. And I think I when we first started talking, I talked about the fact that I wanted kids to have fun. So what we basically do, I'm going to say, we invade the time that young people are using their phones, which is on average, five hours a day, which is frightening to me, frankly. But we approach them and it's something that they can take it or leave it. So we go through Tiktok, Snapchat, Instagram, etc. We throw out these things. Invite kids to come in. They either do it or they don't. Most of the time, we find they do it. We have a high level of engagement, but it's got everything to do with that. They're seeing it as this is curious, this is fun, and then suddenly we're opening up another world to them, and then kids stay and so we have four platforms, and it's amazing to me that they keep going. And of course, again, it's all about fun. So I think that that is really the key to this, and what is really, really important, particularly with with young people in this, in this generation of young people, they want agency. They want to be able to say, I chose this. This is what I want to do without some someone imposing it on them. So I think that we've got to, you know, we're meeting them where they are. They have choice, and they're having fun. Kaitlin LeMoine: I really I appreciated your earlier insight about the research around this work, and like at what at what ages young people are most open to this exploration. Because it, I think it sometimes can feel like, the closer you get to the end of high school, it's like, what am I going to do? What am I going to do? Right in the creative kind of space to explore, it gets maybe a little bit more narrowed, and maybe, as you mentioned, influenced by peers. So I think it, I really love the the process of going from like this discovery phase, right, really, like a design process, and a lot of ways of thinking about like, just this, this discovery earlier on, and then narrowing as one goes through this journey.  Jean Eddy: When we first started investigating this, and the research that we did, and I met a number of wonderful faculty members at University of Virginia, New York, university, et cetera, having these conversations. And I was actually surprised people always talk about the fact that a toddler has this immense capacity to be able to take in information and process it. But likewise, kids who are in the 13-12, 13-14, years old, their brains are working pretty much the same way. So to be able to offer up all of this information, they're ready for it. They're ready to take it in which, you know, I absolutely love and one of the things we also found out, and one of the things that kind of pushed us to move earlier, is the fact that the stress level young of young people, particularly in high school. We monitor it. We've researched it. From the time they were freshmen in high school to their senior year, the level of stress goes up exponentially, so that now it's a case of, what am I going to do? How am I going to do it? Where am I going to find it? Etc, rather than okay, let's take a step back and really think about, what are the kinds of things that, you know, and I always use this phrase that makes your heart sing. You got to do this a long time. So what is it? Julian Alssid: Yeah, it's funny, when you talk about the stress levels going up, it's kind of like, you know, they're building muscle early on. And you know, it's these muscles that that, if you're going to be successful and happy and make your heart sing, you're going to have to figure out who you are and what do you like, and how does it fit, and how do you apply your skills, and how does it tie your academics, et cetera, et cetera.  Jean Eddy: Yeah, and it's a lot. It's a lot to ask a young person. It's really a lot. And all we're trying to do is help them kind of find a pathway to some of that, but it's not going to all magically appear at one point in time, which is why we have to start so early. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, and I think especially in a moment where you know, the job and career landscape seems to be like shifting beneath our feet, right? Like it's, I think, all to have digital tools that can help support those conversations, maybe kind of a little bit more agnostic to exactly what's happening at the you know, this present moment in time regarding AI, right? And the impact there. Like to be able to take a step back and just say, like, wait a minute, let's think about your interests, your passions, like transferable skills, right? Like that feels like a very productive place to start and to have that those digital solutions as a grounding tool in for that learner and for educators, I would imagine, would be very helpful as well.  Jean Eddy: Yeah, and it's just one step in the process. It certainly can't be the whole thing. And I would have to say, I applaud the role that teachers play in this. What I'm trying to figure out is, how can we integrate some of the things that we've learned into the system without overburdening overburdening teachers, because they have too much to do now I know that, and how are they supposed to change the curriculum, get things in there about career exploration rather than being an add on. You know, in some places again, have had to use policy makers, employers and entire communities to make this change. One of our grantees is out in Cajon Valley, right outside of San Francisco, and that Superintendent of Schools basically fervently believes in everything I've just been talking about, and their entire school system, from kindergarten right on through high school, embraces the thought of career exploration and how you connect courses that you take in high school to how you could use them in a career. I remember when I first heard about cajon Valley and the world of work, my immediate response was, these are our people. How do we find them? How do we connect with them? And we did. And then we started, you know, granting them funds so that they could add on to different school districts, which they've done. So it is possible, and it is it is strong. A movement.  Julian Alssid: So that's a perfect segue to a question that we ask all of our guests, gene which is so our audience really represents the various stakeholders that need to be a part of this, from the employers to the educators, hire secondary policy makers, etc, even ed tech people who need to be a part of this. So what practical steps can our audience take to become forces in initiating or supporting efforts to provide earlier opportunities for career exploration and exposure? Jean Eddy: One of the things we do when we do more and more and more of it, this is that we host meetings at major conferences across the country to be able to pull in those constituencies, to have conversations, we have to start conversations with everybody sitting in the room. So it's a case of, you know, employers, it's policy makers, it's educators, all of those people have to come together and we have to start a conversation. I would also say parents need to become involved in this as well. They need to be raising their hands in their school districts, talking to their representatives, talking to school committees about the things that really need to happen to give the young people the absolute best experience they can have. So that is certainly a start. But I would also say that we need to do a better job in getting the word out, as far as bringing people, everybody into opportunities where they can see this live. So I'll give you an example. There is a program out there called school links. It's in high schools across the country. That program right now, and you know, we are partnering with them. They have 160,000 employers on there, on their site. They're in school systems. They have employers there, and it gives them an opportunity to be able to go out and connect in relevant ways. We need to be doing more of that, and there are opportunities to do that. We ourselves are partnering with Jobs For the Future to basically create a site that kids can go to, employers can go to, teachers can go to policy makers can go to that will allow people to see available training programs, how you pay for it, how a major in college or a training program that you've been in can relate to a job. It allows employers to go in to see young people who have the credentials, but more over the interest in some of the jobs they offer. These kinds of things are going to bring everybody in. It's going to pull everybody in I should say, for those people who care about it, and I would say most of us care about it. Kaitlin LeMoine: Right, this is, this is an initiative, right, that I think, as we think about like learners, who then become part of our workers and broader society, everyone cares as we wind down our conversation today, Jean, this has been such an insightful conversation. We've learned a great deal. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Jean Eddy: Certainly go to asa.org there's an awful lot of information on that. And I am not, I am not plugging my book for any other reason than to say that it's an opportunity to see the thinking behind what we do. But moreover, some of the things we are doing in ways that people could get involved. You know, crisis proofing, today's learners, is the is the name of the book. And any proceeds for the book just go back into funding the things that we do for kids. So it's it's and I would also say it's an easy read. It doesn't sound like a textbook. It doesn't read like a textbook. It's a fairly easy read.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. Well, thank you so much for for sharing more about ASA, the initiatives that are top of mind for you, some of the initiatives that are have been a bit more long standing. We really appreciate your time today and look forward to continuing to follow your efforts. Jean Eddy: It's been my pleasure.  Julian Alssid: Thank you so much, Jean. Jean Eddy:  Thank you.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We are also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Holly Zanville, research professor at the George Washington University Institute of Public Policy and founder of the Learn and Work Ecosystem Library, discusses her approach to organizing information about the rapidly evolving skills-based learning landscape. Drawing from her extensive background across education, state systems, and philanthropy, Zanville explains how she created a specialized digital hub that curates resources about key ecosystem components. She explores the growing tension between degree-centric and skills-based approaches in higher education, highlighting how institutions are navigating the "both-and" reality of offering traditional degrees alongside competency-based programs. Zanville shares insights from her collaboration with the Society for Human Resource Management's new Center for Skills First Future, which aims to transform hiring practices for 100,000 employers over the next decade. The conversation examines how employers across five leading industry sectors are implementing skills-based hiring practices, while addressing the critical need for better information sharing and standardized language across the fragmented learn-and-work ecosystem. Zanville emphasizes the importance of collaboration and community engagement in building resources that serve learners, educators, employers, and policymakers navigating this complex landscape.   Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Julian Alssid: Kaitlin feels like every day the way we help people advance their learning and careers becomes more and more complex. Kaitlin LeMoine: Indeed it does, Julian. From employers rethinking hiring practices with skills based approaches to educators, redesigning learning models with AI and experiential learning, our podcast guests have highlighted many new models and cutting edge innovations, and we see these efforts impacting our consulting projects as well. Julian Alssid:  Absolutely, and keeping track of this dynamic and ever changing environment is no small feat. It requires a deep understanding of what's working, what's not, and how all these interconnected pieces fit together.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Which brings us to our guest today. We're so excited to be speaking with a leader who is doing just that, making sense of this intricate and ever changing ecosystem. Julian Alssid: We are thrilled to be joined by Holly Zanville. Holly is a research professor at the George Washington University Institute of Public Policy and codirector of the Program on Skills, Credentials and Workforce Policy. She's also the founder and lead of the Learn & Work Ecosystem Library. Previously, Holly co-led the national initiative Credential As You Go and served as a strategy director at Lumina Foundation. Her background includes leadership positions at state higher education systems and boards in Oregon, Washington, and WICHE, as well as academic roles at community colleges and non-traditional university programs. Kaitlin LeMoine: So without further ado, Holly, welcome to Work Forces. We're looking forward to learning more about your work.  Holly Zanville: I am so glad to be joining you today.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, thank you for being with us. So as we get going, Holly, can you please tell us? I mean, Julian talked a little bit about your background, but we'd love to hear more from you about your background and what led you to founding the Learn & Work Ecosystem Library. Holly Zanville: Great. So as you already heard, my background is pretty wide ranging. I've worked in K 12, community colleges, universities, non traditional programs, coordinating boards and systems in states and in philanthropy, as the strategy director at Lumina Foundation and all those jobs really, I realized recently carry one thread, and that kind of reminds me of what I've always really cared about, and that is my long-standing interest in both information, the quality information and systems, believing that if we're going to make improvements in all of our systems, in education and workforce, we're going to have to seed these relationships and work in collaboratives. And so a lot of my work over the years has really focused on acting like a system and making improvements in systems and sharing information and collaborating. So that's a little bit of my background and what brings me, I think, to really the topic of the Learner and Work Ecosystem Library. And, you know the why. Where did this idea even come from for a library? And actually, it started with my work at Lumina Foundation, when several of the national foundations were starting to pay attention to changes in credentialing that were going on, and especially noting that 40 million some Americans who come under that title that we don't like called some college and no credential. So they had some background in college work, but they never received any credential. And we were really increasingly concerned about what we could do to help with these kinds of issues. So at that time, and this was about 2017, 2018 about 40 of the foundations, mostly national foundations actually came to a meeting to compare notes. How could we really better learn about what investments we were all making on these issues of importance, particularly around micro credentialing, was just coming to the fore around that time so that we could maybe leverage our monies to make them go farther, because we could all see what was coming in the tea leaves. So the outcome of that meeting was actually a call to action, and folks were saying, well, could we develop a map? Could we try to map out the key initiatives, the big footprint initiatives that were being funded mostly by the foundations at that time to improve our information about them, and once we maybe could get the map, maybe we could collaborate more effectively as a group of foundations. So being a person who likes system work and challenging work and mapping, et cetera, I raised my hand to work on this. And so a small number of us from a few of the foundations actually designed what a map of key initiatives might look like, and we put on the map who was working on initiatives, because who's doing the work is really important for us to know. And then we classified them into some key categories. There were actually, over a period of years, three versions of the map, and I think this speaks to how quickly changes were going on in the innovation space of the nation, and Lumina posted it at its website. There's still remnants of it at the website. And one of the things we could all see was that there were important philanthropic investments in all these areas. They were growing, because we could see the number of actual things on the map growing every year, and that there were many collaborations that were going on we were picking up among states, employers, higher ed institutions. And that one really interesting thing to us was that managing a lot of these big scale initiatives were coming from intermediaries, the third party groups that we all know that play such an important role in helping, particularly with collaborations. So this was a really interesting area I became extremely interested in, and my read of the system that we were all looking at the map was that it was going to keep growing in importance and confusion and be marked by lack of information. And so I really wanted to expand the mapping effort then so we could take this a little further. That really was not a priority of the foundation at that time. They wanted more direct funding of the innovative initiatives. And so that was when I left philanthropy to go, after 15 years, to become a research professor at George Washington University. And I kind of took it on as a personal mission to here's my I'm going to bring in FedEx as an example. So I decided it would be good to come up with a bitter airplane that could deliver needed information. And it would, but it would be a specialty airplane. It'd be like a FedEx airport with special airplanes that we'd be carrying specialized information about the learn and work ecosystem. So I started, I reached out to lots of experts around the US. I think many of them have probably been on your podcast, and we designed the special collection and called it a library, the learn and work ecosystem library. It's really a hub. It's like an airport, as it were, where we collect, we curate, we coordinate digital content about key components of the ecosystem. We think there are maybe 12 of them. And if you go to our library, you'll see what the 12 are. There are key topic reports for more in depth coverage of what some of the leading topics are going on in the ecosystem. We included those initiatives and special projects that are working to improve the ecosystem, like we did on the original map, that mostly are, I think 80% of them are probably funded by foundations. So the foundations are playing a big role, and have been in, in fueling the innovation agenda, I think, for the US. We also identified the organizations doing the work and several other features. So we opened for business our little airport in late 2022. We've been growing really quickly. Now we're using AI to help users who come to us to find information using more natural language queries, and we've been adding just two features, and then I'll stop. I'll stop here. We've entered into partnerships with other organizations. If it was FedEx, we found that people have a lot of baggage, and they need to have a place to put their information, and they don't really put it. It's easier for them to put it at a place like the library, where we can host it, and then all their members and other groups can come and see that information there, rather than putting it in a siloed website among all these different collaborators, and furthermore, we're working with a lot of organizations to test the usability of the other library. Does this really meet information needs? Because we're so early, we need to keep testing the waters about that. So we've grown from a few 100 artifacts at launch to over 1500 now we have a glossary of nearly 600 terms that are used throughout the learn and work ecosystem, and we've made that available free to organizations that want to put the glossary at their website, so that as visitors come to their website but they don't know what some of these terms mean, like, what does a micro credential mean, or what is badging and what's up skilling and re skilling, what are skills versus skills based hiring, we have all that captured, and they can put our our glossary, if they like, there and or folks can just be advised to come to our library where we have terms.  Julian Alssid: Given your work now at the intersection, or should I say, the learning and learning and work airport, perhaps we'd like to talk first about the education side of the equation. And we know that one of the themes that has been taking on greater and greater prominence, and we've talked a lot about it on our podcast, is a focus on skills and competencies. And so we're interested to hear your take on how educational organizations and institutions are shifting their efforts to focus more on skills and competencies. And if you could give us an example or two that we should follow. Holly Zanville: So the library and or the airport where education is takes up a lot of space at the airport, as it should, because the preparation of folks for jobs is a very large effort that we all care so much about and is so important to our economy. So but, but to go back to something we've been witnessing for several years now, this growing dilemma for higher education, the big question, should we remain degree centric and continue our literally 200 plus your focus on college degrees as maybe the best preparation for good jobs in the US, or move to shorter term credentials of value. And I'm purposely portraying this dilemma as an either or, but we know that there's growing recognition that the answer really has to be both and. So the and the reason is that higher ed has to be closely aligned to workforce demands by both employer demands and student demands, and there are significant needs and some different needs by industry sectors. So we can't have the same answer for everybody. So degrees and licenses are essential for professional jobs in medicine, nursing, law, architecture, engineering, and a much longer list than that, but there are a growing number of other types of credentials, shorter term credentials, like certificates, badges, micro credentials, energy certifications, that they do have value in many areas of the workforce, and they're often used in which is a good thing, I think, a combination with traditional degrees like associate degrees, baccalaureate and The various graduate level degrees and the impacts of AI are changing and coming on strong, because it's really impacting job getting and job keeping in major ways. So we don't think higher ed, I don't think anyone thinks higher ed can throw away the traditional degrees they offer, but I think there's growing agreement that higher ed needs to update their offerings and expand their offerings to meet changing workforce demands through shorter term credential options. So within this dilemma, along comes the competency based education push for the last, oh, I don't know, more than a decade. And then comes the skills agenda, coming on really strong, with employers who are asking candidates for jobs, but they're also asking their own employees, do you have the right skills for the jobs we have open, show us what you know and can do. And the emphasis is really increasingly on can do. So how are we going to know when somebody has the right competence skills? And I would say that higher ed tends to use the word competencies more to define the learning outcomes that occur in higher ed programs. And employers tend to use the skills word more, but they're coming together, and those words are graying, and now everyone is using the terms back and forth across those fences. If there are actual fence lines between higher ed and important, some of us think there are, but they're coming down, and movement is rapidly approaching. So to answer your question directly about competency based, many of the higher institutions have been shifting their focus toward competencies and actually skills to better align with workforce needs. And we're noting, which we think is really interesting, that educational institutions are adopting frameworks to do this, all kinds of credentialing systems and partnerships to understand what should the new array of credentials be? And we're seeing institutions that are doing both. They're doing both, and they have a portion of their programs that are competency based, are mostly competency based, but there are other programs at their institutions that are not so what's interesting is to have both curricular models on the same campus. But there are also some institutions, but the research data shows that there's relatively few, maybe only about 15 institutions that either are entirely or mostly comps based education. So even though the conversation is rich around competency-based education, the actual number of institutions that have really gone to the major full shift, pretty few, except we know that the ones that have made the shift are very well known. And I'm just, I have a short list of them here. You know Western Governors University Capella, University of Wisconsin Extended Campus, their flexible option, Walden, Charter, Oak College, Purdue Global. And then there's some that are mostly competency based, but not entirely: Southern New Hampshire, Texas, A & M University has several Northern Arizona University, Thomas Edison and Central New Mexico Community College, Austin Community College. I won't go through the whole list, but the point is that we're in the middle of a shift. Some people have already put the landing gear down on their plane, and I think they're saying, well, we've done the areas of programs that really are competency based, like, like nursing that is, or cybersecurity that are led by national organizations that are very strong on here are the competencies in this profession. But there are other ones, particularly the liberal arts, that are not being led as much to being set up as competency based programs. So the institutes have to make their piece, and we all have to put together a system which has a little bit of a lot of things, and this is creating, I think, a lack of information about who's got what and why is this important? So once you accept the fact that differences are good and there's a good reason why we have these differences, then you move to this question of, are we creating a system that is really confusing for employers to understand, for students to understand, for policymakers to understand, for faculty. Yes, we are. We're sorry. We're all sorry about that. But in fact, it's a more difficult learn and work ecosystem now than we've had in the past. And there are some organizations that are making it a little clearer, and on the competency based side, especially, Julian, you asked for an example. I think one of the best ones is the Competency-Based Education Network, or C-BEN. They've really been growing rapidly, working with institutions that really want to understand how to do compass based education and why to do it, and what happens on a campus where you've got both-ands, how are they, how they are navigating the choppy waters. So I would say that through the kinds of workshops, webinars, training opportunities, C-BEN provides, they're a really good example on the higher ed side for competency based education. And I've already named some of the institutions that are really on that side. So I think I'll stop there, because I think that's a lot of the background, least that I think about when I, when I think about the competency based side of things with higher risk. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well and and I think what you've just talked us through there Holly shows right exactly the complexity that we're facing here, and that with this confusion, the need for a library is more and more essential. I just had one quick follow up regarding the library.  Who is the primary target audience for the library? Is it professionals in the field? Is it learners themselves? Could it be both? Holly Zanville: It's all, and in fact, when we have a slide, when we do slide presentations, it has 26 stakeholder groups, and when you go to the library, you can do a search by your stakeholder group, so you could be primarily a policymaker interested in content. You could be a credential provider interested in content. You could be an employer and workforce. You could be a workforce board. You could be more aligned with the data structures around that side of the shop. You could be more of a journalist trying to understand, where do I go to get information and examples for stories. So and students we're really hoping are using the library, particularly students that might want to get a job someday working in this with the think tanks, with the research and policy think tanks, the intermediaries that I talked about where, if you're in graduate school now, and you might be in education or political science or economics, you'll get some of this information, but you are not. I just would bet no one's going to be talking about the Learn & Work Ecosystem, and you're not going to be learning about the full array on the learning and the workforce side, and how it comes together and why we need to redesign so we think that the library is a place where students up and coming, and young professionals, young in their career, professionals and professionals who are at the foundations, professionals who are in these think tanks, could learn a lot about who's doing this work. I only know about some projects. I don't know about not that we capture all of them, but our aim was to capture all of them, and so we love to think that there's a huge number of different kinds of stakeholders that could benefit by better information about the very systems that we all have to live and work in Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely. Well, and as you acknowledged earlier, right, like, is there this? I think you called it a line or a silo, right, between all these entities, but ultimately, having an ecosystem library that says, You know what, no matter who you are in this work, just as the type of information that's out there is, is essential. I think it has been essential for some time, but I feel like more so than ever now. The need is not going away.  Holly Zanville: A standard language, if you if, if in your state, your legislature says we're going to call these things micro credentials, but in another state, we're calling these digital badges, and the third state is going to call them certificates. That's fine. No one's going to make anybody come to one standard word, but we do need translators, and we need to understand the range of terms that are being used, roughly what they mean who's using them, so that we can talk among ourselves and trigger information well. So that's been another important aim of the library.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So if we, if we can shift for a moment to the employer side, not to say there's like you said, not to say there's sides here. But if we're looking at this from different vantage points, what, what are you seeing from the employer perspective on skills? I know you mentioned skills based hiring. But you know what and what prospective employees no one can do. What are you seeing in that space? Holly Zanville: Well, on the employer side, and they often have their own language that we all need to understand. That skill based hiring plane has left the airport to continue that metaphor, and it's really gaining speed. So the skills agenda, it's a movement. It's a driver of change. It's reshaping how employers are evaluating talent and how individuals are preparing for job, and also how they're keeping their jobs and moving through their careers. And so I'll just mention four things that we're seeing on the ground that are really impacting employers in this space. So employers are clearly more focused on identifying individuals who can succeed in their job roles, regardless of how or where they gain their skills. And this practice, the good thing is, it can open doors to job seekers who may have been overlooked by traditional degree hiring practices. They may be in that 40 million who have some college with no credential, but they may have acquired skills through experience and through their college programs, etc, where they should have those doors open to them and employers will look at them for potential positions they have. We know that employers are using a range of tools now, like skills assessments, training programs, job simulations to evaluate the competencies that applicants say that they have on their college transcripts and in their portfolios, probably on their job applications. Because employers are not just going to accept what people say they're, you know, they're going to test them. And there's a lot of tools, increasingly, out there to see whether or not you have the skills that you indicate that you have. And then the other, the fourth one, which I think is really important for all of us to recognize, is that this is not just for the young adults coming out of, let's say educational programs or their first job, or two, employers are really promoting a lifelong learning approach, where their employees are going to be gaining new skills through industry certifications and on the job experience. And so it's like everyone is like redrawn and redrawing that line to follow through to whatever age you're putting it on. And then there's a group that's working on trying to talk about a 100 year economy versus, say, where you're going to work for 40 years. And my own view is you're probably going to be working for closer to 60 years, if you're lucky, and have good health and so that we we, but we don't provide a lot of good assistance and information to older adults who are going to stay in, in in jobs and maybe even transitioning among jobs. So there's this tremendous flux going on, and this is partly in the skills agenda. So I want to touch on a research, or body of research that I find really interesting, that comes out annually from Mercer, and they call it the Skills Snapshot Survey report. And the most recent survey that they originally just put out finds that the adoption of skills based talent practices is accelerating and organizations around the world. This is not just in the US, but worldwide, are embedding skills from hiring, including career development, to compensation promotion. So this is a pretty pervasive movement. It's not just about the original job getting there, this is not happening equally as we would expect among all industry sectors. So there's some really interesting data from Burning Glass and from McKinsey that have spotted five industry sectors that they say are leading the way in skills based practices. So this won't probably be a surprise to most folks, but the first on the list is information technology and software. The second on the list is healthcare, with evolving roles in telehealth, informatics, patient care health systems, all expanding their use of credentials to validate skills. The third one is in advanced manufacturing, where many of those employers in precision machining, robotics and automation, they're using industry certifications and competency based training to address their workforce shortages. A fourth on the list is finance and insurance, where increasing demand for digital literacy and analytical skills that are not actually taught at least until recently in traditional business degrees, is happening. And so the skills agenda is really important in finance and insurance. And the fifth one on the list is retail and hospitality, and especially for frontline roles, employers are using skills assessments and micro credentials to identify talent and support career advancement. So it's pretty interesting that, you know, some folks have gone first. We can learn from them, but we need information to come back to the airport thing. If we can get information and make it available, maybe people in retail and healthcare, they'll know about it, but others maybe will not understand all of this. And so that's the role the libraries to try to be a watchtower place to look out, try to pull information in and code it and put it in some insofar as to help people really understand this kind of changing movement around the skills movement. Julian Alssid: So on that employer side, we understand that you're the library is working with the Society for Human Resource Management, or SHRM on their new Center for a Skills First Future. Can you speak a little bit to the fact that SHRM is now stepping into the middle of this pretty big deal. Can you tell us a little bit about your collaboration with SHRM?  Holly Zanville: Sure, and we're really excited about this, because this really makes it clear that employers are such an important driver of a lot of the reforms that are going on in our economy, affecting all of us. So they've, as you've just noted, the SHRM Foundation, with SHRM, has announced that it would launch this new Center for Skills First Futures, and they launched it literally just on June 2. So this is just, you know, a week and a half ago. And the purpose of the center is to modernize traditional hiring and the advancement systems that are tied within workforce over literally the next decade, and are sort of seeing this as it's going to take maybe 10 years to get significant work done, and they've got a large goal. They want to transform hiring and advancement practice for as many as 100,000 employers and 500,000 human resource professionals, managers and executives, who are very involved, of course, in hiring and setting the policies among employers and how did they come to this? Well, it came out of research that they had done that found that many companies were already turning to skills first strategies because they needed to, because of their talent needs. They were having shortages, etc. 90% of the employers that they were studying acknowledged the benefits of skills first hiring, but only 15% of them indicated they had actively implemented skills first hiring, and they weren't sure how to do it. They really needed help. So this data was really, I has really been driving the SHRM center, and I'll touch on the four pillars of the work at the center of which our library is really closely involved with one of them. So the first pillar, which is really interesting, is to evaluate an organization, a company's progress in adopting a skills first approach. And they have an interactive tool that's available now in their new center that they're calling it a Skills Action Plan. And that tool can assess where an employer is at in its development. You might be at the beginning level. You might be an intermediate. You might be advanced in using skills based hiring. Well, once they know which level you may be at, then SHRM plans to help to guide the company's learning through a training offering and this unique library of resources. So the second pillar is the resource library, and that's where our library has been so involved in this effort, because they built their library to provide research tools, employer examples, and glossary terms, etc, for those who are going to be implementing skills, first strategies across the whole employee's life cycle. And the cool thing for us is that the library, and I think for them too, is that it's being powered by the Learn & Work Ecosystem Library's tech architecture. So they provide their content to us, and then we enter into our database, and then they pull out information using the kind of special coding and stuff that we've been able to put on it to feed their library. And we're really excited that the library can play this role, and we're gonna, you know, we'll be learning a lot on both sides about how to do this. How does a library beget another library? So the third pillar is to go back to that training, one that I mentioned, once they know where you're at as a company, and they're offering a skills-first credential, and they're offering a training regimen opportunity. I think it's going to end in a certificate to train HR folks in skills based workforce strategies, depending on where they start. And that's why that first assessment, that tool to assess where you're at, is so important. And then the fourth pillar in their new center is a vendor database, and basically they're putting a lot of information about sourcing and assessment for upskilling and mobility, etc, for folks that want to have data around what they're doing. So we're just one of a group of partners that SHRM is working with to bring this major resource forward. And I think we're going to be seeing a lot about this in our literature going forward, as I think we're all going to be impacted by what SHRM is doing with their new center.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, that sounds very exciting, and as Julian said, I feel like it shows where the employer space is headed, right like this is a major milestone moment in that work. So thank you for sharing a bit about that and the way that the library is supporting that effort. So Holly, drawing from your past experiences, we always ask a question on our Work Forces podcast about becoming forces, or our audience is interested in how to become forces. So in this case, we're wondering, what practical steps can our podcast audience take to become forces in both using and sharing valuable resources to navigate the skills based future. Holly Zanville: I love this question because when we built the library, we kind of wanted to build it as a Wiki model or a community engagement model, so we kind of feel like the community, all, all the folks we're talking about, should sort of own this library. So this is not Holly's library, even though I'm passionate about it, because to have the library be useful, everybody has to provide content. We hope that folks will visit the library and find resources that are useful, if not, tell us if, if, if, if visitors, people on this podcast, have information that they know of initiatives or glossary terms that they would like to see there, let us know. We'll put them in the library and they become part of the community engagement model, to become part of the Wiki model. So we're hoping that folks will really engage with the library, help make it better and use it and let us know if that airport is working, and are the flights? Are the flights coming out on time? And are they accurate? And are they all working so and if folks really want to follow us closely at the library, there's easy ways they even sign up for our e news, where they can even follow along some of the new features. I didn't cover all of them today, but you can follow along with what we are doing, and you can see our latest, greatest information. We're on LinkedIn, so we hope people will read some of our social media and follow us there. So we're excited that we're all in this together. And we, you know, going back to the very beginning of the podcast, we think  collaboration is going to be the name of the game and sharing information, and we just have to figure out a way at sharing good information. So we want to have curated good information that helps advise us as we try to navigate what truly is and probably will continue to be for a while, a pretty messy, confusing ecosystem that we're all sharing. Julian Alssid: So Holly, then I guess that means that anyone who is confused, doesn't know where to go, we're going to send them straight to the library.  Holly Zanville: That would be good.  Julian Alssid: No, no, it's great. It's a great resource. You've offered so much really excellent information about the state of play. And you know this is, this is definitely ongoing and unfolding before our eyes. Thank you so much for taking the time to talk with us today, and you know we will continue to follow your work as well. Holly Zanville: Come join us at the airport. Kaitlin LeMoine: We will, we will. Thank you so much. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces, we hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please Subscribe, Like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Steve Lee, CEO of SkillUp Coalition, discusses how his nonprofit technology platform connects nearly 3.5 million workers without college degrees to career training and job opportunities nationwide. Drawing from his diverse background spanning corporate law, educational technology, and philanthropy, Lee explains the coalition's "data-driven, heart-led" approach that ingests labor market data from partners and tests it with real workers to improve outcomes. He shares insights on navigating AI's impact on gateway jobs like customer service, emphasizing the shift toward skilled trades, advanced manufacturing, and green jobs as more automation-resistant career paths. Lee discusses the importance of balancing national reach with regional customization through 35 localized sites that reflect specific labor market demands, and explains how combining "air game" technology with "ground game" wraparound services creates more effective worker support. The conversation explores practical strategies for building mutually beneficial partnerships in workforce development, with Lee advocating for humility, value-addition, and collective impact as essential elements for scaling upskilling efforts and addressing intergenerational poverty. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin Lemoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. A central focus in our consulting practice and on this podcast is practically how to make meaningful connections between the various organizations and resources that exist to help people close gaps and advance their careers. Julian Alssid: Absolutely, we've seen a surge of new tech products designed to bridge skills gaps, connecting individuals with training programs and with the employers who can hire them. And key to their success are solutions that are designed for and responsive to the needs of the end user. Kaitlin LeMoine Precisely. And that's why today we're excited to dive into a conversation with a leader who is at the forefront of using technology to connect millions of workers to meaningful career opportunities. Our guest is Steve Lee, the CEO of Skill Up Coalition. Steve has a fascinating career journey that began as a corporate lawyer, then saw him found and successfully exit an educational software company and work at Bain & Company. He then transitioned to the social sector, including a significant role at the Robin Hood Foundation, before taking the helm at Skill Up.  Julian Alssid: Steve brings a blend of business acumen and a deep commitment to social good, and we're looking forward to speaking with him about how to upscale efforts in a world of rapid change, especially with the increasing influence of AI. Since launching Skill Up in 2020, Skill Up's nonprofit technology platform has already connected nearly 3.5 million workers without a college degree to career training and job supports nationwide, and the coalition now includes more than 150 partners. Impressive. Kaitlin LeMoine: Truly. So Steve, welcome to Work Forces. We're so glad you could join us to share more about these impactful efforts. Steve Lee: I am so honored and thrilled to be here. Thank you both very much for the current show. I will say my family, says I'm a dork and so, true story and so anyway, just thank you. It's a pleasure to be here and looking forward to the conversation. Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. Well, as we get started, can you please tell us a bit more about your background and what led you to your work at Skill Up Coalition. Steve Lee: So as you, as you alluded to. I was in a private sector for a good chunk of, let's say, the first half of my career, but I've always sort of been interested in having some impact on the social side. I had a really good conversation with a nonprofit leader when I was in the private sector, and she said something which I thought was really interesting. She said, Steve, I've been doing this work for 50 years, and I serve young people and adults. And she said to me that when I serve young people, there's a very good chance that 30 years later I'm gonna see the same person to serve their needs. And what that struck me is this idea of not only just poverty, but this idea of intergenerational poverty, where poverty goes to multiple generations. I'm like, damn, this is not good. This is not the country I want to live in. So what the heck can we do about it? And so that's one of the main reasons I joined philanthropy, is to think about a way, in a very small way, obviously, right where I could have some impact, if you will, in a small way, on this idea of improving what I think is one of the biggest scourges in this country is intergenerational poverty and the fact that half of 30 year olds in this country now are worse off than their parents were when they were 30. You know, inflation adjusted, that is a very bad step. All right, that's what, that's what that that's what drives me with the work I do. It's why I came to Skill Up. Because I feel like one of the ways is you can, one of the ways you can address that is, if you have stable wages for good work you have stable families, you have stable kids, and the kids can do better in life. Because every parent in the world, I don't care who you are, rich, poor, you know, Democrat, Republican, urban. It doesn't matter. Every parent wants to carry do better in life, every single parent. So when we're doing a very, very bad job of that. And so that's why I take this work that we do at scope is important, and why the ecosystem is important. So that's the reason. Julian Alssid: It's really sobering when you see those stats about declining wealth, and we've got to fix this, because we've helped create this mess - our generation, the concentration of wealth. And I mean, we could go on, but tell us a little bit more about who Skill Up serves, who you're looking to serve in this kind of intergenerational approach and the range of initiatives that you've developed. Steve Lee: We are, we're primarily designed to serve STARS, if you know that terminology, those are Skilled Through Alternative Routes, which is basically folks that don't have a college degree. We have a particular focus on the lower rung of that ladder, right? Those who are maybe on public benefits, those are the most marginalized in this country. And we serve youth all the way to dos, and on this journey, I think the most important thing for this journey for us is the fact that we are a coalition, so it's actually our official name. We're not, we're not Skill Up we're Skill Up Coalition.  That's actually our IRS registered name, and that means a lot to us, because we're a small nonprofit, right? What the hell are we going to do by ourselves? Like nothing, like literally nothing, right? So we can only do something if we work together with some of our core partners. And if you go to our site, you can see some of our core partners. These are folks who are leaders in the field, and we do our best right to add value into that ecosystem. We can talk a little bit more about what value means, but the most important thing for us as an organization is to truly partner for mutual benefit. This is one of what our funders love to say, mutual benefit. It's actually pretty hard to do mutual benefit, to work with others to create collective effect. I can give you examples of that, but that is one of the most important things we can do. Kaitlin LeMoine : Please say a little bit more about that when you say mutual benefit. Let's dive in there a little bit.  Steve Lee: Yeah. So let's talk about what I think is one of our key jams, right? One of the core value sets that we have, one of our core principles is to be data driven, heart led. I've always liked that term, because as a technology nonprofit, we are driven by data. Obviously, I'll talk about what that means. But everything we do, we hope, is for the benefit of workers, right? And we have workers at scale, and we've learned the time. And so one of the coolest ways that I think we work with partners is on the data side. And let me explain what that means. So we have become a platform for low wage workers, where people are coming to us to some degree with data sets, and what they want to do is they want to test those data sets with real workers to get their worker voice on whether this stuff works or not. So I'll give you some examples. There are some really interesting data sets on the employer side. Groups like American Opportunity Index, which is funded by Burning Glass in partnership with the Schultz Family Foundation. There's a Credential Value of Index, I think that's what it's called. Used to be called EQOS, which has sort of the signals of quality for training programs in America. What these programs, what these data sets have, is really, really good data, but they have no way to surface that data with real workers. And so what we're doing is we're ingesting those data sets, and then we're spitting those data sets into the arms of workers across America, using a skills platform as a vehicle to do that, and then we're learning to see what works for real workers. This is what I call heart led right? What's the worker voice? What are they telling us what works and what doesn't work? And then we're spitting that back into our partners to improve their data sets. So it all comes full circle, this idea of ingestion, spitting out data, learning from data, and going back to the original source as a full circle, that's like, really, really important, I think, in the broader ecosystem. And I think we're one of the few platforms that can actually do that right, because we have technology, we have good UX/UI, we have workers, we can send things out to, and then we can test a real scale, like 10s of 1000s, right? Within a week or two, to have statistically significant data that comes back to us that we can inform the field that's a real value, and that's what that's mutual benefit, like, we're helping our workers, right? And in theory, we're also helping the data sets. That doesn't happen all the time, like mutual benefits, actually pretty hard, but that's one example, Kwsaitlin and how we're thinking about mutual benefit, particularly around benefit, particularly around data, because I think that is probably one of our biggest jams, is the ingestion of data, plus the data driven heart led, right? The ability to access workers and get their workable voice. Kaitlin LeMoine: That's a complex space in which you're sitting to build that mutual benefit with, as you said, right, like the end users, like the people you're looking to serve, as well as with your data partners.  Steve Lee: Correct.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Living in the middle of that space, I imagine, is exciting and also pretty complicated. Steve Lee: You know what's interesting? What I've learned is, like, this is gonna get very wonky, but like, data is it's basically just like a bunch of fields. But what's tricky is that you have to match those fields like this is, like, wonky data stuff, and like, actually matching those fields to collect the right information to get out to the right is actually very tricky, right, because there are so many fields. So that's actually the hard work. But once you get there, it can be pretty powerful. In terms of stuff that you learn. Julian Alssid: So Steve, just sticking with this one a little bit longer. Again.  Steve Lee: Sure. Julian Alssid: This is the geeking out, because I think our listeners will be very interested. We want to talk about AI and the workforce. But of course, are you using AI in this effort to then sort of mine and collate and organize this data? Steve Lee: Yeah, we're using AI, I think, so why call this idea of more stuff and better stuff? So this is like, like third grade English, right? And so what we can do with our, with our AI, is the data sets that we have, we can have more of the things that we want. And what I mean by that is that our main call to action for our users is, hey, what's the right career you have? What could work? What career do you want? What job do you want? And three, you probably need some kind of training to get the right credential to get the job. All right? So what training is available to you? So what AI can do is that it can surface up more opportunities that we wouldn't be able to surface up, but for the power of AI. So that's one, and second, we could be better at what we offer. One of the things that we pride ourselves as being high quality, and we curate all the opportunities. And the curation is done a lot by data sets, plus desk research. The desk research can be somewhat replaced by AI, right? So rather than having a human, or in conjunction with a human, you have AI to make that research better, and so you have better stuff that we show up as high quality content, as opposed to just having a human, plus data sets, plus you have more stuff, because there are some things that we're missing, because it's a big country or a small nonprofit, right? And so more stuff, better stuff is not what we're doing in terms of the things that we power. The other thing we're doing around AI is what I call horizontal integration. So as you guys know, the journey from a low wage worker starting to look for a job, to finding the job, can actually be more than just a few inches. It can be miles and miles and miles, right? It takes a long time. It takes months, sometimes years, right? And so if our users stick with us, what we can do with AI, no matter where they are in their journey, you can offer AI as a recommendation, no matter where you are. So your beginning part of the journey, AI will make some kind of recommendation to Julian saying, We think you should do A, B and C, but Kaitlin is further along in her journey and is about to interview for a job. We could offer a different AI experience. So can say, hey, you should think about doing this for an interview, things of that sort. And AI can do that almost like when you do a Google search. Now, you don't see this, you don't see the search results. You see Google AI, overview, right? That's the first thing you see. Similar concept for us, no matter where you are, you're going to get something around AI, and then hopefully that helps you drive to at&t organizations. So that's a horizontal integration, right? And the vertical is more stuff, better stuff. Julian Alssid: Are the learners, workers, whatever you're calling the clients. Are they staying with you? I mean, you've, you've now, you know, you do have this growing data set. Steve Lee: It's the trickiest wicket of a direct to consumer platform. You know, unless you're Meta or Google, it's hard for direct to consumer users to stick right. And we have the same issues as others. I always say about roughly half of our users drop off after sort of initial experience and then, but the other half stick around to some manner of form. And the first that's actually pretty good, right? As a direct to consumer, nonprofit, right? So we're actually proud with, like, the half that stick. But what our partners say sometimes, even if they come and they bounce, maybe there's value that you just don't know. They come, they browse a little bit, they leave after 30 seconds, you don't know, you don't know what value you've had. So our friend was like, okay, the fact they don't stick around for you. That's okay, because maybe they have some value just in the 30 seconds that spark an idea, and then they go someplace else. But maybe we sparked an idea. We just don't know that Julian. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, and we are living at such a, you know, complex moment with respect to the labor market and the shifts we're seeing there. And I'm curious, Steve, you know, to hear you speak a little bit to that as it pertains to the platform and other initiatives you're working on as well, because I can imagine, you know, part of what you're saying about whether people stick or not, I mean, it has to for sure. That has to do with all these other shifts that are happening in the broader landscape. Steve Lee: You know, it's funny. One of the things that we think a lot, I think about a lot, is where, where's the puck going? I'm a big hockey fan of all things. And you know, as a kid. I used to follow Wayne Gretzky, and he had like, three eyes in the back of his head. He knew where the puck was going, right? And we're not that, but we try to prognosticate. And there are data sets that do this kind of stuff, right, and there's desk research. Yeah. And so to be very specific about it, in the world of AI, because that is where the puck is going. In fact, that's where the puck is. How do we have a platform that is going to serve the worker now and serve the worker two years from now and five years from now? The thing that's come up most recently, and it's fairly, fairly obvious, is the world of skills, trades, advanced manufacturing, uh, green jobs, things of that sort that have come to the fore recently, one, because there's been a lot of money that's been pumped into through the Biden administration, right? Rightfully so. But also, I think people are realizing that this might be sort of what I call the anti AI, right, as we think about, like, entry level jobs. And we've sort of, there's been research, some recent research through BGI and some others. Let's say, you know, college grads are not getting hired as much in the most recent cycle, in part, maybe because of AI, right? So we don't know what's going to be bounced right because of AI. I happen to think even though some of the jobs that Skill Up has now will be bounced because of AI, and if that's the case, then we shouldn't have those jobs anymore, right? Let's be honest. So we're trying to think about where the jobs are so we think skilled trades, advanced manufacturing, there's a piece of that. We have some pretty big efforts afoot right to do that across America, tied to some big federal federal grants with a couple of key partners, and tied to some community colleges that are doing, I think, really cutting edge work on some of the training aspects around getting people the right credential for some of these advanced manufacturing, green jobs, and I think some of the stuff will be important. Yeah, this is it takes a long time to get this to fruition. We're working on that now, as I want to call the anti AI, right? As we incorporate AI into our specific product experience. Julian Alssid: As we're trying to hone in on the future and where the puck's going. What are you learning and what are some of the challenges you're facing?  Steve Lee: I think we're learning something. But what I just say, right, yeah, which I think, and this applies to Skill Up, because Skill Up's main jam is to help people get what we call gateway jobs. And the discipline knowledge that Opportunity@Work has created through their STARSs Tear the Paper Ceiling Campaign. The challenge with gateway jobs in the world of AI is, I think some of those gateway jobs ain't gonna be here. Like, I really don't right think about things like, like, a customer service rep. I'm going to use that as an example. That is, that is one of our gateway jobs, at least. I think it is right. You think that's gonna be around three years from now? I don't know. All right, let's say that's the level of scale. So I think what we're learning now is that some of those things ain't gonna be here anymore. The challenge is, if that's the case, what's the alternative? And the deeper challenge is, how do we get a non traditional, marginalized worker into this new future that might have been relatively easy as a customer service rep, right? You can get that without paying a lot of money for short-term training, or we would just get the job without a college degree. Maybe that's feasible, but the other stuff may require a two month credential at community college. It might right, it might cost you $2,000, so how do you get that especially working with marginalized populations? So what does that mean for us? Maybe we need to go up the food chain a little. Maybe work with less marginalized people, maybe that have the need to take a two month, $2,000 course. Maybe I'd rather not do that, because our jam is to serve the hardest to serve population. So I think these are things that are floating in my head. It is like supply, labor, supply, demand issues. It's very tricky, but part of why we exist is to be able to offer things that are of the moment, that are real, viable, and high quality. And I don't think I'm going to use customer service rep, I don't think it's going to be high quality. And if I don't think it'll exist right in three years. So that's a struggle that we work through Julian as best we can. Julian Alssid: A great example. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, well, and I would imagine, too, the other piece of this, as you've said, right, this is a coalition effort. And I guess I'm wondering, how do you go about forming and reforming partnerships and coalitions to advance this work in a way that is, you know, kind of timely, and as you're saying, maybe moving where the puck is going, even if we're not all entirely clear exactly where that is. What are some considerations that you take into account as you go about that work?  Steve Lee: I think part of it is that what I hope we do is we go in with some humility. All right, into the conversation if you want partners, because we don't have all the answers, and sometimes we are not the right partner, so you should kick us out, and we should be humble enough to recognize that we shouldn't be part of that big kids table, right? That's true. And so, so. But if, if we think we should be, I think we hope to come in in this mindset of value add you. In some manner or form. So think about some of the things I find, like a market opportunity index, or what used to be called EQOS, right? We came in there thinking we can add some value because we have an asset that maybe you don't have, which is this ability to test with real users using electronic experience, but it's actually going to make your data sets better. So I suppose I always try to come in with humility, with value add, with mutual benefit. And I think the fourth thing is, is someone doing this already? We are not the only a career navigation platform, right? There are many, many, many, many right across the globe, as you guys know, some of them are friends, right? So the question is that that's already being done by somebody else, then it makes no sense for us to bring it right? No value add. I think that's actually really because we live in a world where we don't have enough time to compete. We just got to do our thing. You do your thing. Well, if you want us great, or if we add value, if not, they kick us out, right? And that's perfectly fair, with a mindset of humility, right? As opposed to being a little bit, you know, angry about it.  Julian Alssid: Don't get angry. So on the so on the topic of coalitions, a lot of our work involves, you know, navigating, building these kind of, these coalitions and I was, I was looking at your May newsletter or your LinkedIn announcement about your newsletter, and you talked a little bit about the data and the distinction between national and regional or local coalitions. And I know you kind of play in both spaces. Can you? Can you speak to that at all?  Steve Lee: Of course, regional is really important for us for very various reasons. One less important thing, this is where the funders sometimes might be right. Let's be honest, right? Sometimes you need money to do some stuff, right? There are a lot of regional funders, but that's not, that's not the most employing, yes, we have a national presence, right? True. If you're in North Dakota, where we don't have reasonable experience, you can take the value of Skill Up right in terms of things that might be virtual or remote things, great, but everything, as we know, I knew you all know this right, happens at the regional level. It's where the labor market goes, it's where the employers are, it's where the people and their families are. And so we have built, I want to say, 35 regional sites, and I think the value of those regional sites is that they're very bespoke to the region. So the things we offer, whether it's the right career, the right job or the right training, is all tied to labor market demand in that region. So when you go to Los Angeles, right, you're going to see a very different experience, right? If you go to my home state, home city of New York, versus some of our other 30, 30, plus users, right? And that's really, really valuable, because people in Los Angeles don't get don't give a crap about me, or vice versa. I don't give a crap about Los Angeles, right? I hate the Dodgers, right? And the Lakers. I just care about New York, although New York kind of sucks too, to be honest, when it comes to sports, but New York, New York is its own beast, right? And it's its own, its own employment, right? And all employers, and that's the experience that we offer that's rich and deep. The other thing it brings that is often difficult for us is a ground game. So we have a really good air game, aka technology, which we think we do, what we miss sometimes is the ground game with local on the ground organizations to do really meaningful work. And if we can better connect our users beyond just the air game into a ground game where they can get direct support for things like wraparound support service, things like that, that's really, really, really valuable air game plus ground game. And some of our partners are looking for that combination. You can't get that in North Dakota. I'm just making up North Dakota, right? You can't, because we don't, we don't, we don't have a ground game, right? And that's really powerful. So you get local assets important for the user, and if we can work it out, you get a ground game of support services that better enrich the experience for workers in that community. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, I love this notion of the air and ground, right? Because there's also the way that the learnings from the ground game could impact the air game too, right? And so having the ability to operate at both of those levels just makes so much good sense.  Steve Lee: Totally, totally agree.  Kaitlin LeMoine: There's like endless lessons that you're pulling from, from some of that regional work.  Steve Lee: Exactly. Kaitlin LeMoine: To inform what you do, more broadly. Steve Lee: Exactly. Julian Alssid: I was just gonna say, I mean, you know, we need maximum flexibility, right? Because everything we're talking about is like, people, machines, national, local. It's like, it's a very fluid system. So we need all the tools to bring to the table. Steve Lee: Indeed, indeed we do so. Kaitlin LeMoine: Steve, drawing from your experiences and pulling on, I guess, all of the different threads we've been talking through today. What practical steps can our audience take to become forces in scaling up, upskilling, and workforce development efforts. What are some practical takeaways you might recommend for others looking to do this kind of work? Steve Lee: Reach out, right? I'm easy to find. To find me on LinkedIn right, and let's try to work together, right, because you just never know, right? So I think that's my first advice, is reach out and because who knows, right, what great things can happen. The other thing I would say, and that this is more of my, like, my philanthropic experience when I was about managing here in New York City, is to do something this makes any sense you run a nonprofit in a particular region, approach, maybe approach things with this idea of like humility, value added, and mutual benefit, if that makes any sense, because I think people, people want to work together. This is also, if I'm being honest, it's where the stakeholders and the funders are going. In part, if you want to get the resources and nonprofit to do great work, more philanthropists are asking for joint mutual efforts beyond just your own effort. And so I think it behooves us as an ecosystem to think collectively together, just like philanthropy doing is, you know, recently they've done much more. And I like this about having, like this collective effort stuff. There's like an AI collective funder group. There's like a skills trades collective group. There's an impact collective group, right? When I used to do philanthropy, I didn't, I didn't give a crap about other other funders. I just wanted to be in my own sandbox, right, Robin Hood, right? But now people will think that's really good, right? Think the same as a tactical organization is if you can work together with others for some level of mutual benefit, even though it's hard because you have to give a little bit, I think money, it's a little easy to get money, if that makes any sense, right? That's a very tactical money, because people care about money, right?  Kaitlin LeMoine: Those are two pretty foundational - provide a lot of direction - in those two recommendations. So thank you for that.  Steve Lee: Thank you. Great question. I'm really, really, really honest about like, working together, like, and that's the thing that's really important. And some of the coolest partners we've had have just been through random conversations. Julian Alssid: Well, that comes through loud and clear, Steve, and you know, it's been such a pleasure talking with you as always today. And you know, we look forward to continuing the conversation. Really appreciate you taking the time. Steve Lee: It's my pleasure. Thank you both for all that you guys do, and I'll make a plug for you guys. I think you guys have been awesome. I think about one of the best podcasts out there in America for workforce so thank you guys for what you do.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you so much.  Julian Alssid: Very nice of you.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces, we hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at Work Forces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please Subscribe, Like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Niesha Taylor, Director of Career Readiness at the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE), concludes our three-part series with Jessica Perez from LaGuardia Community College and Bryan Quick from Abbott, showcasing how institutions and employers are successfully implementing NACE's career readiness competencies. The conversation explores practical examples of breaking down silos between higher education and industry, from LaGuardia's digital badging program that has provided 700+ students with paid internships to Abbott's skills-based hiring approach achieving a 70% intern-to-full-time conversion rate. Taylor emphasizes the critical need for faculty professional development to help students articulate their classroom learning as career-relevant experience, while Perez and Quick describe how career readiness competencies create a common language across the education-to-employment bridge. The discussion offers actionable strategies for creating supportive environments where students can confidently showcase their skills and for employers to develop comprehensive frameworks that prioritize workforce readiness over traditional degree requirements. Transcript Julian Alssid:  Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Welcome back to the third and final installment in our special mini series with the National Association of Colleges and Employers, or NACE. In our first episode, we spoke with NACE, President and CEO, Shawn VanDerziel, who provided a high level overview of the college career services and recruiting landscape. And then we dove deeper into the data in our second episode with Mary Gatta, who leads naces research efforts.  Julian Alssid: Now in this third episode, we'll explore how colleges and employers are optimizing academic programs, career services, and recruitment practices for our evolving economy. We're excited to be joined by Niesha Taylor NACE's, Director of Career Readiness, with a background as a former Dean for Academic Innovation and Career Success at the City University of New York's Gottman Community College and Senior Director for career pathways at the New York Jobs CEO Council, Niesha draws on her range of experiences bridging higher ed and industry in her role at NACE. In an exciting new twist for Work Forces, Nisha will join us today, along with a college and business leader who work actively with NACE to implement innovative models. Jessica Perez, Director of the Center for Career and Professional Development at LaGuardia Community College -- my former employer, too, Jessica, we'll have to talk about that -- and Bryan Quick, Director of Global University Relations at Abbott. Jessica Perez: To give a bit more background, Jessica oversees the SOAR Experiential Learning Program, the Almezzi Foundation Career Fellows Program, CUNY Career Launch, Spring Forward and several other internship programs at LaGuardia. She's also an adjunct assistant professor at Lehman College and a Career Research & Development Consultant for Virginia Peninsula Community College. And Bryan is the head of Global Early Careers at Abbott, responsible for a worldwide team accountable for the design and delivery of the enterprise strategy to attract and recruit next generation talent. In his role, he oversees a global team dedicated to building strong partnerships with universities and managing early talent engagement programs. Jessica and Bryan are both involved with NACE, serving on various committees and in leadership committee roles. So welcome to you all. We're excited to have you with us for today's conversation. Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. So as we jump in today, Niesha, we'll start with you. Can you please tell us more about your background and your role at NACE. Niesha Taylor: I think the sort of critical first chunk of my time that makes sense to mention here is that I worked in higher education for many, many, many years, always with a focus on increasing access and really expanding economic mobility for the City University of New York students. I came out of K through 12 background, so I've always been thinking about that, that access point, and helping students become more successful and really get the most out of their college opportunities. In the last couple of positions I had, I worked on a variety of grants and initiatives that really worked to integrate career thinking into higher education. That actually started with Jessica Perez. I'll say she kicked off all of my thinking in this area. Gave me the sort of sort of background tools. That's the first time I heard of NACE and learned a little bit about the NACE career competencies, which I'm sure we'll talk a lot about in today's conversation. So really helping students see how they're learning and academic experience and beyond academic experience, were things that were really relevant to mention and put forward in connecting into their first career opportunities. So as that happened for me in higher education, I got deeper and deeper into the commitment to helping students really see that next step beyond college. In the role that I had at Guttman Community College, I kind of learned more and new ways of connecting career thinking into the classroom. Working with faculty quite a bit, which was really where I started to do a lot of faculty professional development to help them see how to bring the academic experience, sort of in connection, or bridging into the world of first jobs and first interviews for students. As I headed into the New York job CEO Council, my first step outside of higher education, it made me really understand how siloed higher education can be, and how much more we need to connect with employers and really help students see that bridge more clearly, take those steps more directly. And so that's really kind of what landed me at NACE is kind of building that firmer stance for students understanding how their learning connects into the first step into career. So NACE has developed itself in this area of career readiness, and again, that connects to this idea of understanding core competencies, those competencies that employers are looking for. I'd worked with those so much over the last stretch of years, and had started to work with NACE in building an assessment tool for those career competencies. And that kind of walked me towards the experience of starting, as you know, working with NACE full time and doing a lot of faculty professional development and really connecting into our employer partners to see how NACE competency development could really be developed across that bridge into employment. Yeah, I think that's kind of the sort of core story there and and really, the area that I oversee is really called Career Readiness and and connects down into the focus on those competencies and career learning in the classroom and beyond the classroom for students. Julian Alssid: Can you talk a little bit more about, you know, kind of how then you're, you know, what are the tools and services that that NACE offers, and you talked a bit about your faculty development work and the competency work, obviously, and and then how are you working with both educators and the employers to break down these silos? Niesha Taylor: What's interesting is that there's such a strong presence at NACE of career services professionals and leaders, and they have for many, many years, been focusing on those career competencies as a kind of foundation and a structure to integrate into various student experiences. So NACE really, has for many years worked with career services folks, and I think part of what's happening now is there's a broader awareness that this is a critical part of the college experience, and they're looking for ways to expand the professional knowledge and really tap into the professional knowledge of career services and stretch it across colleges. So what that looks like is always continuing to have deep and focused conversations with career services professionals, but help them advocate for expanding that focus across a college experience, so connecting it into academic affairs, teaching faculty about it, having program development that builds NACE competencies over time, so that it's not it really can't sit just with career services, especially because career services are typically very under resourced. They just cannot stretch. I mean, Jessica will tell you maybe some of the numbers of like, how many students her office is supposed to serve, and it is often true that there's not enough people in career services to have, like, a decent caseload of students. So NACE works a lot to help a college see how to start to integrate that career thinking across the experience, how leadership can get on board, how faculty can start to learn what's going on, and then how to build just an ethos of focus on career readiness from beginning to end of an academic experience. So that's really the higher ed side. And I think that numbers are something like 75% of the colleges we work with engage career readiness and the core career competencies, something like 30% do that really across the college. I think about 40% do it in a like department wide or stretched across a couple of departments. LaGuardia actually does a really beautiful job at it expanding, but it's, it's really rare that a college gets and really spreads it across the college experience, which is ideal for a student so NACE really brings in efforts to the college to help do that work, particularly to me, that's faculty professional development for the most part. But we also might work with, let's say, if it's focused in career services already, might expand it into advisement, for example, or take it over into student leadership work or things like that, to start to take those next steps, but it's a lot of professional development and support and community engagement to get that going. On the employer side, it's working with recruitment folks, and you'll hear this story from Bryan, more specifically, of understanding that so many colleges. Across the US are really building on this idea of of career readiness and how to engage that conversation as they're focusing and talking to students on college campuses, and then how to help them build their skills as they're coming into early, early career or internship programs at the college so that trying to sort of create the common language across higher education into employment, so that students can really leap, you know, and grow as they enter into those first layers of employment on the other side. And that work is newer to me, but really is exciting. It's, you know, you'll hear this story, but it's there are so many employers that I've spoken to are really grabbing this idea and being able to tell the story better for students as they're bridging over into employment as well. Great. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, thank you so much for explaining at a high level how you go about doing this work across higher ed institutions and with employers. And so we're excited to dive into a couple of examples. Jessica, I guess, and Niesha, let's let's start there. Can we talk a little bit about the relationship between NACE and LaGuardia Community College, and you know, how did the relationship develop, and what have been some successes you've experienced in your work together, and some challenges or things you're working on as well.  Jessica Perez: A little bit about my history when I started in higher education back in 2009 I think I'm aging myself now, but that's when I first was introduced to NACE being the Assistant Director of Career Services at Bronx Community College, which is also part of the City University of New York. And my involvement started it very simple as resources, right access to professional development, really being up to date with industry trends, that was really the goal of being involved with NACE and then let's fast forward to my role at LaGuardia Community College. When I first started at the college about maybe a few semesters in, we started this new initiative of co-curricular transcripts, and how could we document the student experience outside of the classroom, but with that twist of career readiness. So what we started, and that was when my work started with Niesha, was that we developed digital badges at the college in different areas, but I'll speak specifically what we did in career services. We have the Career Readiness Digital Badging program, which still exists to this day. We started very small with just federal work study students, providing professional development to those students so they have a real experience versus, right, not just being in a front desk answering phones. And then what we did was we aligned the job descriptions of the students for each department to the competencies, and I also aligned with the competencies of the college. So again, we're speaking one language when it comes to competencies, right? Because competencies, the word competencies, could be very foreign to our students, and from there, it has evolved to our current SOAR Experiential Learning Program, which is funded through the LaGuardia Foundation, and students are placed in entry level internship positions related to their major. So if they're interested in accounting, we will find them an entry level accounting position, and they will do a 12 week internship, and they get paid a $2,000 stipend, and they get awarded a digital badge. So actually, I just presented on Friday with some colleagues at City Tech, which is also part of CUNY, and we were talking about these microcredentials, and the value that students find. It motivates them to want to complete the internship, and they also build self confidence for our students. So again, right to answer the original question, that's what has allowed me to continue being involved with NACE and also in various leadership roles, because I'm very passionate about the work, especially for our first generation students that is mostly our population within CUNY, and helping them find value in their own career readiness and also leverage career connectedness across the college so because really, career is we all own it right? Career services, we lead the work, but we need our stakeholders and our partners, specifically faculty, to be successful in this work, and they have been my biggest stakeholders.  Julian Alssid: I'm interested to hear a little bit more about kind of the successes and challenges that you've experienced in this work. Jessica Perez: Sure. So successes I just mentioned that, right? We want to, we have a really successful internship program. We've, we've provided at least 700 students with paid internships that have earned digital badges, which have led for them to either find a second internship, I get hired at a second internship on their own because of the career readiness competencies, or the student has been hired by the employer, or even found independently, right with our resources, another job which right a couple of years ago that was unheard of for community college students, that they're completing at least two internships before graduation. That's a major success. But again, that's all thanks to right? The framework that NACE has developed that we've been able to tweak and make our own at LaGuardia. Challenges, of course, is getting buy in from across the board, right? Especially when it came to the digital badges. Not everyone... They feel that it's extra work on the student or it's extra work on them, whether it's right, whether it's a staff or faculty member. So it's really having those conversations of what is the value, especially from the student perspective. They are finding the value in this. They are finding it helpful, and it's helping them align what they're learning in the classroom in their minds, right to what they're doing outside of the classroom. Because when they're meeting with an employer and Brian, you could probably speak to this, right, they don't know how to articulate what they're learning in the classroom as experience. They say, I have zero experience. Now let's talk about the different projects you've done, research projects, service learning activities, they're like, oh, wow, I actually have a lot of experience in this area. But again, it's our job as career services professionals or higher education educators, right in general, to educate, coach, and and help students articulate these skills that they actually have. So I would say that it's a strength, but also a challenge getting students to really be able to understand that they are proficient in these skills. It's just a matter of they. I had a sorry, I'm gonna go into a little rant, but a student of mine, and actually in one of the courses I teach, didn't feel confident that they actually have skills to put on their LinkedIn. But it's a coaching and saying, Hey, what have you done in the classroom, in this in this class? Oh, you've done two presentations. What does that mean? Oh, I have communication skills. Yes, you're able to present. And he's, he's done an excellent job in doing that. So again, it's about coaching and bringing that awareness to the students, to be able to share and not feel shy, to show off everything they've accomplished. Niesha Taylor: If I could jump in here too. So I really learned about the challenges when I was first working with Jessica. We were working on a project that brought advisors together with faculty. We were doing, like an advisement team, and it was the first time I like Jessica, just like, brought her folks to be a part of those teams, and then where things went well, faculty members who had been kind of like, I would like, say, dismissive of career services under started to understand the depth of knowledge that those folks brought to the table. This happens over and over again. It's worth mentioning that, like in higher education, there are all of these hierarchies where the faculty feel that this is a side thing. It's an over there thing. And so the more we can really dispel those myths and really raise up the expertise of this group of folks that have a critical function at the colleges, I think we start to help to bring that conversation into the classroom and help because it shouldn't be that a student goes to that class that you just described, where they presented twice, but they never thought of what that real learning meant and how to bring it into the into the room. And I always use that idea of showing off Jessica, because I have met so many CUNY students who like I think there's a lot of sort of cultural barriers to that, that feeling of what you're supposed to do in an interview, which does feel like showing off or bragging. And so I had a faculty member I worked with who framed it nicely. She said she'll have her students practice talking about what they accomplished, and then she'll ask them to do it again with pride and try to put their shoulders back and say, like, what would this look like if you walk in and you just feel like I really do have an amazing set of skills here, and I'm going to tell you about it, so that articulation point is really critical. When we do faculty professional development at NACE we make sure not only that a faculty member understands how to point to those experiences that might work on a resume or in an interview, but that the student is handed the opportunity to talk about it, to say those things, to try to feel what it feels like, to show off a little and say how good you are at something, because we know that's what they're gonna have to do when they sit in that first interview. Kaitlin LeMoine: Just as a follow up to this part of the conversation, I'm wondering regarding the career readiness, competencies, how are they continuously updated? I mean, maybe, I guess, you could say, how were they developed, but also just, how are they updated and kept current and I think you know, as you're talking about your work with Jessica, with students and work with faculty members, how do you ensure kind of, there's this process of continued refinement?  Niesha Taylor: Yeah, I mean, this is all all developed sort of before I walked in the door. But I've really learned a lot like how seriously they take every step of the research that brings them to the competency. So the initial set was, you know, it's always through our members. So we have members who are employers and members who are high in higher education, in career services, but in all different areas of higher education, talking about what really works, what really matters, and what is going to make that difference. So you'll hear a lot about now a skills based hiring, right? We have fewer and fewer folks being hired because they have, like, the highest GPA, and these skills tend to be things that that are looked for in a variety of ways by employers, like through an interview process, an assessment of some sort, et cetera. And so we're updating them based on feedback in the second so they were developed, and I think in 2015 and then there was an update in, I think 2020 where they went through and kind of looked through them and adjusted, and that all takes a good long time. This, you can sort of refer back to Mary Gatta and all the research, because we've tried to think about even adjusting them a bit. And it just every step. If we're going to take that step, it's going to take time, because it's such a serious process. I will say that, you know, if you look deeper at the at each competency, we have a definition and sample behaviors. And those sample behaviors were also confirmed through a really broad research project where we had a technical sort of partner who was able to push these skills out and really confirm that these are the skills that made sense to connect up. So for example, for critical thinking, which is can be a blanket term, can mean a million things. We had to kind of get specific about data analysis and decision making like, and what does that really look like in terms of expectation in the workplace, and then validate those behaviors. And so, you know, any adjustment or shift will again, take that much time and effort. And so I think, you know, obviously we saw a shift at about five years. And so there will be a process again, like, okay, when do we need to take a refreshed look at this? And that's when we are all engaged Task Force at NACE, the research team and a variety of processes for looking at those sub behaviors and things like that.  Jessica Perez: If I could maybe jump in as well from the career services side, what we do is speaking with our industry partners is extremely critical in maintaining right everything that we do up to date, and we use, you know, like cast as well, to stay up to date with what are the current trends, especially in the majors that we offer, we have developed advisory councils, which includes faculty and our employer partners. So they're a huge right voice in the work that we do, but also the faculty really engaging them in this work, which we started back in 2015 and has evolved over the years, like, for example, now we're working with the English department. They're creating assignments for the health sciences majors, a new major that we have, and really developing a reflection for students, which then is going to be followed by mock interviews with partner employers coming in. So I do my best to kind of integrate right the academic with also bringing in an industry professional. And that's how we keep our badges and anything that we do related to career readiness updated and right and up to par  Julian Alssid: Well, so speaking of the voice of the employers, Bryan, you've been very patiently listening to this great discussion of the education side. But of course, none of this is going to happen if we don't have employers on board and in sync. And so really interested to hear from you about the relationship with NACE, how it came about and about your work, and the sort of the successes and challenges in applying this approach to the recruitment side of the equation. Bryan Taylor: Oh, thank you. Thank you so much, Julian and Kaitlin, and thanks for inviting me to provide that employer perspective. As you mentioned. You know, this is a really personal topic for me, because I grew up in a really small rural area in South Carolina as a young student, and I was a first generation college student, as Jessica was talking about, one of those first generation college students. My parents never went to college. One of them never even finished high school. So you know, I understood really early the importance of being able to decipher, you know, the code of how to be ready for a career whenever you, you know, you do go through a university experience and get a degree. You know, that's not the stopping or the stop point, it's, it's the starting point. So I've been very passionate, not only just in my work at Abbott, but also whenever I first got engaged with NACE, which was actually when I worked at the Walt Disney Company. Before working for Abbott, I got a very early start understanding the benefits of the NACE partnership in my work at Disney, prior to coming to Abbott. And having served on many committees with NACE, as well as currently, right now, actively serving on the board of directors for NACE, I can tell you firsthand that I've had the privilege of being able to witness this evolution of my relationship and Abbott's relationship with NACE. I think it started when, and maybe it was Niesha that mentioned this as a challenge that employers have is really connecting the dots and bridging those gaps between education and employment. And we recognized, I think early on, the value that naces research brings the resources and really even the community that you get through NACE that helps you shape your hiring practices as an employer. So over time, not only just in those committees that I've served on, but also through our relationship with NACE, we've been able to grow our programs through these initiatives, my team participates in a lot of NACE events. We partner with the community to align on a lot of these, these elements that go into our recruitment strategy and build workforce readiness. And as I mentioned right at the beginning, this is something that's been very passionate for me and my team, and I think one of our busy, biggest successes, in terms of a success story, has been to integrate into our hiring practices a framework of skills based hiring. And I'm not just going to throw that word out there, skills based hiring, because I think that's used a lot really specifically. What it meant was helping define for our team members in talent acquisition the differences between behaviors and skills and competencies and how they are all related together, how they build workforce readiness. And that's really helped us understand what we need to do when we not only just go out and interact with students and engage with students before they come on to internship opportunities or or full time opportunities with us. But what we do once they're here and once they're in in our in our industry and in our organization, how do we continue to develop those skills and develop those behaviors so that students are what we what we like to call workforce ready whenever they graduate from university. I think what this has helped us really do is not only just tap into a more diverse talent pool, but it's also helped us really move, I think, beyond those traditional degree requirements that I think a lot of industries and companies are used to having as a factor whenever you are interviewing students. Of course, you know, we still have challenges with that, like aligning to some of our recruiting teams and internal stakeholders. You know, we still have, we are 145 year old company. So you know, you're always going to have some of those, those challenges of an evolution, of changing some of the old behaviors, especially when it comes to how most of these teams have been used to going out and engaging students or recruiting students. But I will tell you that the partnership that we've had with NACE has really helped bridge those gaps and help help us evolve as an organization, I think we've used a lot of the NACE data and the dialog to help keep us moving forward.  Julian Alssid: And so are you seeing, then greater adoption, you know, from your colleagues? Bryan Taylor: We are, we are. And you know, it's interesting too, because once you start seeing some of the best practices put in place in some of the return on investment from those best practices. For example, we'd have, we now have, it Abbott, about a 70% conversion rate of our interns to full time. So that's a key metric for us, right? You know, our programs exist at a intern and co-op program standpoint. To convert talent to full time. We want students to work for Abbott. Our CEO is very passionate about this. He has mentioned several times that Abbott is not a training ground for other companies. We are a starting point for people that want to get their career started here. So how do we do that? We do that by really making sure that our recruitment strategy. And our techniques and our development opportunities that we provide are tapped into those workforce readiness competencies that NACE has put out there. So we have built a lot of our internship programming and co-op programming around those eight competencies. We design a lot of development opportunities for our students to really continue, as I mentioned, to build on those skills that we look for when we're actually going out on campuses and having discussions or interviews with students. So not only are we we, you know, convincing the business that this is the right thing to do when we're out out recruiting, but it's also an important part of the experience that they play a key role in, right? So the managers and the assignment leaders that interact with these students when they're with us during internships and co ops also have to understand that it's it's part of their role to help develop those competencies too, as well to build those skills. It's not just about technical skills anymore. It's about, you know, everybody used to call them soft skills. We call them foundational skills, but it's also tied into the behavior piece too, as well. And, you know, those two things coupled together really build on the competencies for for NACE, and that's, that's the approach that we've been taking. It's not revolutionary, but we have had to have some change, you know, in terms of being able to adapt and and adopt this as a core part of our development strategy for for early talent at Abbott.  Niesha Taylor: One of the things, just to jump in, you know, part of what I've learned by talking to Bryan a little bit more and understanding how he's incorporated, you know, NACE competencies into his work, is really that he had to kind of build a lot of the curriculum. I'm calling it curriculum because, you know where I come from, but the kind of learning that happens in the early job experience, he's developed ways that he's really teaching those NACE competencies to the folks that are coming through the internship in the same way we think about teaching them in higher education. And so we've gone through a process of developing a curriculum. It's a kind of a first step of like, how do you expose students first to what are these competencies, very specifically and hopefully hands on? And we're looking at that higher ed curriculum, and now we're going to bring it over, and I've invited Bryan and a few of our other employer partners who've done this work already, to see if we can come up with a framework for employers that are sitting in that same area to not have to build from scratch, but to really help folks develop those skills that are going to help them succeed and grow in their careers, and hopefully stay right what the employers really want to have folks that are retained and growing, and so that's part of what the competencies can offer. Bryan Taylor: And Niesha, I'll just add in there, you bring up an excellent point that, you know, I think a lot of employers are probably sitting on the sidelines of doing this type of work because they don't have that framework and they don't have that playbook, right? So, creating a playbook for employers to really just get some ideas on how they can do it and they can, they can adopt and adapt, you know, you know, elements of of that framework to make it work for their own organization. That was key for us, right? We didn't have to, you know, take a specific example and go word by word, or, you know, chapter by chapter, on how to, how to execute this type of curriculum in in a work for a workplace environment. We built our own and, you know, but, but we didn't start from scratch. You know, the partnership with NACE was really important in terms of, like, understanding what was going to be really successful for us, and how do we build it so that we accomplish the things that we wanted to do, which nyesha mentions, you know, we want to have students that stay with us and and stay long term over the years well.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I feel like this conversation is is leading us to we always kind of ask, given that the podcast is called Work Forces. We always ask a question about forces, and I feel like this conversation is leading us right there. So you know, as as as we're all, as you all think about these experiences working both within your organizations and then across organizations to make this work really come to life, or learners and and employees and interns. What steps can our listeners take to become forces in preparing workers and learners for successful career navigation? I know, Bryan, you just mentioned, right, this concept of this playbook. Jessica, you talked about really, you know, making it really clear to learners like this making it really transparent. These are the skills you have, right? Like this is what this what? How you can explain them. But we'd love to hear any other action items or steps you would recommend. Jessica Perez: I would say, creating a supportive environment for your audience, right? So if you're in higher education, your career services, professional or faculty member. Where it's really creating that safe, supportive environment for students, also aligning the competencies to what already exists. So it's right. It's not about reinventing the wheel or creating new structures, but it's really about what are we doing, making an assessment of what we're doing, and just elevating and enhancing it for your students. So like, for example, right? Simple assignments that are already happening have been designed by our amazing faculty. It's then just aligning the career readiness competencies and then that safe environment for students, and it just a lot, right? It's like one happy community. And also for career services, is really involving industry professionals like Bryan that are passionate about this type of work, that really want our students to succeed. He's not saying that others don't, but really encouraging lifelong learning for these students and making those connections, helping them make those connections of what they're learning in the classroom and in their co curricular programs, and really being an advocate for career education, because right, we all went to college for a reason, and it was right for our careers. So it's really bringing that to the forefront, as this is the main goal of our students. How do we attach all these extra things that we do and package it really well in that safe environment for students. Niesha Taylor: I'll add there Jessica, that I feel like sort of what, what's represented in this conversation is a bridge that doesn't always and off or often exist. Having worked in higher education for most of my career, and really how I was an advocate, right? Like, you know, starting with that work that I did with Jessica at LaGuardia, building up to the work I was doing at Guttman, I really was advocating for this, but I didn't understand how little I was engaging with employers until I went to the New York job CEO Council, and really was sitting in front of recruiters and employers for a stretch of time and hearing them. So I think one of the things is to really break down some barriers to employer engagement, to start to get very direct about that need. So that's one thing is to really just realize that higher education has siloed itself away from employers. It's the sort of critical endpoint is degree attainment instead of job attainment. And I think the more we advocate for looking at that as the critical step that needs to be offered, you know, as a result of the time and effort, especially for first generation, for young people of color, for the folks in New York that Jessica is serving, you cannot ignore the need for a job. As a result of higher education. Folks are sacrificing their time and energy and efforts there, and they need to have that return on investment. And then the other thing I would say is internal to organization, internal to higher education, there's a real sort of push away from what I think feels like the corporatization of higher education. And I think the reframe, and we've heard it very much in this conversation, from Bryan's really sort of personal focus, is this is not an issue of like bringing a corporate lens into the classroom for that the sake of takeover. It's really a focus around equity and access and really like economic mobility, fundamentally. And if you see it from that direction, I think you can start to loosen and open really the broader academic experience to making stronger and more real connections to our employer, partners, folks that really need to offer the jobs to those books that we're teaching. So I think that's, it's a reframe that's really necessary, and getting and getting folks on board in that way. So that's some of the advice I would offer is Think carefully about really what the endpoint is, and try to be a little bit more supportive of what students really want out of their education.  Bryan Taylor: Yeah, and I'll say, just from the employer side, I think a lot of us get into this role and into this line of work, because we are passionate about giving people more access, giving people more opportunity, right, and and that's aligned with what nace's mission is, too, is to increase access and opportunity for for students like Jessica, students at her school and and all across the country. And I think one of the biggest steps to doing that, if you're an employer, is you first got to understand what it means to be embracing skills based hiring practices, right? You know, I think, as I mentioned before, a lot of times, people utilize that terminology, but they may not fully understand that. Uh, there are things that, if you're if you're sitting here thinking, Well, I don't have a skills based hiring approach, do some research and figure out if that's actually true or not, because in some cases, you may have some practices in place, like you may have already started to look at your job descriptions as an employer and and really reframe those so that they're focused on skills. That's a skills based hiring, you know, tactic and approach, right? Very simple, but it is, it is an element that is an employer element of this, this whole discussion that we're having, you know, thinking about how you're training your assignment managers, as I mentioned before, they are key to this whole experience of, you know, develop, you know, development around workplace or workforce readiness. So, you know, all of us, I think, in this space, are are enthusiastic about working with the business and making sure that the managers are the right managers, and they're the ones that are trained to be able to deliver the right type of curriculum, from an industry perspective, to help develop students that is a skills based hiring approach. So those are two great examples right there that that I think oftentimes, some people on my on the industry side, might sit, sit here and say, I don't have a skills based hiring approach you do. So just, you know, thinking about it and being more intentional about it, and using your partners like NACE. And then finally, the last thing I'll say is, you know, I never thought of myself as a as a data guy, but there is so much data that can be leveraged to really be able to tell the right story to your business leaders, if they are ever, you know, wondering whether or not this is the right approach, or what the return on investment is for, for going down this path, use the data that is, you know, my number one recommendation I always give to my team and to any, any of our colleagues that I partner with across the NACE organization, is the data is key, and it will really tell you, Like, what's working, what's not working. And you know how this approach really has, has helped us not only just convert students into full time roles, but keep them long term. So those are just some of my recommendations. I mean, if you're an employer, you know, listening to this, just trust me that we've all been in the same place at some point in time where we're like, this is a heavy lift. Where do I get started? You know, those those small, simple things, I think can really get you, get you to start building up momentum, so that you get to a point where it just becomes practice for all of your recruiters, Niesha Taylor: I think, understanding that we're talking about an ecosystem here, right, like you're getting all the way to that place of building talent and helping folks, you know, become economically mobile, like once they reach into the employer side. But it's really an ecosystem coming from higher education and the variety of ways you can get a degree or certificate and start to build out, and that's it's a whole ecosystem you need to pay attention to across all of those lines, and it takes a lot of flexibility. And so I know, having worked with Jessica a lot and having gotten to know Bryan's work, these are flexible thinkers, there's a lot of innovation involved in trying to navigate systems that are really stuck and opening new roads here, one of the ways, and Jessica mentioned this, is to be flexible. In the land of higher education, with the things that are already in place, that sort of are forced by our creditors or measured, there's usually a set of outcomes that are required for your college to stay accredited. Those outcomes are almost always at least, like 80% aligned with these NACE competencies. And so finding those connection points is really critical. We have been working with the AAC&U, the American Association of Colleges and Universities, and their leadership is very open and committed to seeing these alignments, I think in the next year, you'll see a sort of more official statement that shows our the commitment to the competencies and the the outcomes that are listed by AAC&U these things have a crosswalk, and there's no reason for us to see them as separate things, and that we need To really take those steps to be flexibly connecting, you know, sort of the those sides of the house in higher education. And then I think that same kind of flexibility is what you need to see across the bridge. Look at your intermediaries. There's usually a ton of folks that are helping to bridge between higher education and employment. How are they making those links and connections, and start to think flexibly about doing the taking, the kind of steps that Brian has been able to take, to really kind of pull and open up the doors from higher education into employment. Julian Alssid: Yeah. What's so interesting to me, listening to you all is how, how so much of this is, is there to be had. And I think, you know, like, you know, on the education side, this idea of, you know, industry being kind of anathema to what we do, it's like no. And especially the more we see AI creep in, the more they need those academic skills. I mean the employer sides, like, yes, we do skills. We look at skills and so but sort of teasing that out and so much is about this framework that NACE and you all are bringing to your work that, to me, seems to keep the framework. It's the processes. It's drawing on the data, and then the relationships within and among you know your various partners. So as we wind down, how can listeners learn more and continue to follow this work?  Niesha Taylor: A very simple way is to go to, you know, NACEweb.org, to go to our website, to get linked to some of the core information. There's tons of resources we have. Not only we have publications that are really from our research team, deep research reports, but just tools and resources. If you go to the career readiness section, you'll see how to really navigate these competencies, and lots of examples of articles, of folks that are, you know, model practices in implementing the competencies in the way that's been described in our conversation. So that's one way is to connect there, yeah, and keep, keep your eye out for for NACE events. You know, ways that you can come into conversation and hear folks who are doing this work learn from those specific examples in our webinars, in our annual conference. And you know our offerings in terms of, you know, really learning space that NACE offers.  Bryan Taylor: Yeah, I'll just echo that, uh, plug for, you know, just become a NACE member. Because, you know, a lot of the key learnings that I've gotten over the past 15 years have been from attending, you know, the annual conference, or some of the events that NACE puts on, even virtually, just so many ways to just get plugged in and connected. And it's not that difficult to become a member, for sure. So, you know, if you're an employer for you know, out there that you know, has two recruiters, it's, you don't have to have a team of 200 to become a NACE member. You know, it's, it's open to everybody. And I think that community, as I mentioned before, is just, is so important, you know, to be able to bounce off ideas and and be able to have the collaboration and the in the just the conversation around these types of topics. Julian Alssid: Great. Well, thank you so so much for taking the time. This has been wonderful, enlightening conversation, and we look forward to pushing it out there. Niesha Taylor: Thanks so much for having us.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you.  Jessica Perez: Thank you.  Bryan Taylor: Thank you.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We are also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon, and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Mary Gatta, Director of Research and Policy at the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE), continues our three-part series exploring the intersection of higher education and industry. Gatta shares up-to-date insights from NACE's latest Job Outlook Survey, highlights the growing importance of experiential learning for the job prospects of new graduates, and discusses the significant shift from GPA-based hiring to skills-based approaches, with two-thirds of employers now implementing skills-based practices. Gatta also emphasizes the critical need for faculty involvement in helping students translate classroom learning into career-ready competencies. The conversation offers valuable research insights for higher education professionals, employers, and students navigating the evolving landscape of college-to-career transitions. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  Welcome to the second interview in our three part mini series with the National Association of Colleges and Employers, or NACE. In our first interview with NACE, President and CEO, Shawn VanDerziel, we discussed the broader landscape surrounding College Career Services and recruiting. Shawn provided an overview of the field and NACE's work, highlighting its central role as a knowledge-based organization with research at its core. Today, we're looking forward to delving deeper into that research with Mary Gatta, who leads NACE's research efforts.  Julian Alssid: As Director of Research and Policy, Mary brings over 20 years of experience in teaching, research and advocacy on issues of education, employment and retirement, inequity. Her work focuses on evidence based research analysis, developing solutions around economic security, education, and workforce policies. Before joining NACE, she held faculty and research positions at the City University of New York, Gottman Community College, Rutgers, University's Center for Women and Work and Wider Opportunities for Women in Washington, DC, which is, I think, Mary, where we may have actually first met. Mary Gatta: It was it was where we met, yep.  Julian Alssid: Indeed. So welcome to Work Forces. Great to have you.  Mary Gatta: Thank you for having me.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes. So great to be with you today, Mary. Thanks so much for joining us. And as we get going today, can you please tell us more about your background and your role at NACE.  Mary Gatta: I come out of higher education. For the most part, I spent most of my career in higher ed, in faculty roles. My training is in sociology, so I have a PhD in sociology, and my study, my research, and also a lot of my teaching has really been around work and understanding the impacts of education on labor market rewards, looking at the impacts of systemic inequities and how to mitigate them. So when I joined NACE as our director of research and public policy about four years ago, I was really excited, because the work that we do in terms of our research work at NACE really focuses on how to better understand the outcomes, the career outcomes, of college graduates, how to understand it across lines, levels of equity, and also how to understand the employer side, like, what are employers looking for in recent college grads? So it was a really great opportunity to kind of marry all of that for my own career, and also we know how important evidence-based research is around career outcomes for college graduates and for university recruiters. So that has been, is, really the focus of our research work at NACE.  Julian Alssid: So tell us a little bit more. I mean, at NACE, you're sitting on a real trove of data. So I know you must be in, you know, in researcher heaven, tell us a little bit about that data that you sit on, and add a little bit more about the types of specifically the types of reports you generate, and who uses them and who they're intended for.  Mary Gatta: We do a variety of surveys for our research throughout the year, and we in terms of kind of our samples, we are using...we're fortunate that we're able to survey our members, both our higher education members, who mostly sit in the career service kind of field, and also our employer members who really focus on university recruiters. And what we do throughout the year is do research, sort of, on career centers, right, career services. So what's going on in higher ed? What's going on with employers coming to campus to recruit career fairs? Kind of those basic benchmarks. We also, on the employer side, look at recruiting benchmarks. So what does the recruiting cycle look like, right? What is the hiring cycle look like for college grads? What is the hiring cycle for internships? What are the projections for the upcoming graduating class in terms of entry level hires? What are employers? How are employers thinking about things like skills based hiring, for example, and skills based practices. So throughout the year, we survey both our higher ed and our employer communities on those topics. We also, once a year, do a student survey, where we send that out in the spring through our higher ed partners to students, right where we are able. You know, how are students thinking about experiential learning? What have been their experiences? How are students thinking about the job market? What have been their experiences on how many interviews have they had? How have they sourced those interviews through career fairs, except networks. This year, for the first time, we did over this past summer, a survey of early career talent. So we surveyed college grads who are one to 10 years out to kind of look a little deeper into their outcomes. How did things like experiential learning opportunities during their college tenure impact their career outcomes? And then the final little piece of data. We do is our it's not little, it's actually quite big. Is our first destination survey, which is we look at aggregated levels of what are the outcomes six months post graduation. So we're in the process now of collecting that data for this class of '24 and then that report will be out in the fall.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So you are busy, you're there's a lot you're collecting from a lot of different stakeholders, and really, living at the intersection of these worlds is really fascinating. Can you tell us? I mean, there's so many different directions we could go in this conversation. But given that you've recently conducted the job outlook for 2025 can we start there? Like, what have you learned?  Mary Gatta: Yes. So we have just released, this is hot off the press, our Job Outlook Survey, which is a survey of our university recruiters of employers about what the job outlook looks like for the class of 2025.  And we do this survey twice a year, I should say once in the fall, and getting those projections and then again in the spring. So what we are seeing now from our very, very hot off the press data is that right now, college hiring, college graduate hiring, is expected to be about flat, right? We're just seeing about a .6% increase. And just to put this in a little context, in comparison, in the fall, when we surveyed our employers, their projections was they were expecting hiring to increase over 7% from last year from the class of '24 levels. So I think that's a really important data point that we now that we're into the spring, and we're seeing basically a flat increase, a flat hiring projection, really not much of an increase from last year. When we go a little deeper into it, we see that about 65% of the employers in our survey intended to just maintain last year's hiring level, and a little less than a quarter expected to increase that. And just related to that, we do an internship survey every year looking at the benchmarks and the hiring and in our internship survey that we conducted just this past winter, we saw that employers were expecting to bring in fewer interns this year than they did last year. They are projecting a decrease in about 3% in intern hiring. So that's sort of an early sign that there might be some softening going on around hiring, because typically our job outlook projections and our internship projections felt like kind of run or pretty much aligned. So where that's sort of just some other interesting point that we're seeing right now. Julian Alssid: Mary, can you? Can you tell us a little bit of what you're saying by industry? I mean, are there particular, is there anything that jumps out at you with those terms?  Mary Gatta: Yeah, no, we're kind of seeing it pretty comparable across industries, and so I don't think what we're seeing specifically in terms of industry, it seems to be relatively steady overall. When we look specifically at some industries, we are seeing some hiring projections with increasing around wholesale trade industry, management consulting, and transportation, and some decreases, larger decreases In chemical manufacturing, like pharmaceutical manufacturing, computer and electronics manufacturing, and motor vehicle manufacturing. But of course, with any industry analysis, you know, our Ns are really important here, so I would just take that a little bit into consideration, but that's pretty much what we're seeing.  Kaitlin LeMoine: It's interesting to hear you speak about what sounds like a separate survey done around internships, but seeing that there's also a slight decrease there. And yeah, I feel like we're hearing kind of across the landscape the importance of experience and going into the job market with experience. I'm curious just to hear your thoughts.  Mary Gatta: We did a survey about two years ago, on employers, and 80% of employers told us the best return on investment they get for recruiting strategy is internships. And further to that, in our job outlook, we collect data on using the GPA as a filter. So what that means is our employers using the GPA to filter out college grads and back in 2019, before COVID, about 75% of employers said, yeah, they're using the filter. The GPA is a filter. Now we're seeing that decrease to about anywhere between 30 and 40% of employers. And what's replacing that (and it's even for employers that are still using the GPA) is experiential learning, so having internship experience, work experience, and also being able to articulate your skills. So I think even though we're seeing this dip in internship and projections of internship hiring, experiential learning writ large, is really important as a recruitment strategy. And then just added on to that in our early career talent survey that we conducted over the summer, we ran the analysis of students who did some type of experiential learning, whether it was an internship, whether it was undergraduate research, whether it was work, study, study abroad, and those who did not. And what we found in the first one to three years after graduation, those who were experiential learners had more jobs, career satisfaction, saw a higher value to their higher ed, and had an average of $15,000 higher salary. We very much have consistently seen in our research the importance of experiential learning, coupled with (and experience learning is a great way to do this) being able to fully articulate what are the skills that you're learning, be it in the classroom or in a co curricular.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, well, that's it's really, I appreciate you broadening the lens on internships to really be about that experiential education piece, and the recognition that maybe it does come from an internship, or maybe it comes from your involvement with a student activity or a club or leadership experience, or what have you. So I think that's a really interesting and important call out at a time where experiential education just feels so important to kind of demonstrating skill sets, right? And being able to articulate. Mary Gatta: Yeah, being able to demonstrate skill sets. And also, I mean, there are other important benefits. Think about social capital, type benefits, right? Access to mentors, networks, you know, kind of an understanding of work. All of that is really important that comes from experiential opportunities.  Julian Alssid: Looking beyond the job, the job outlook report, can you speak a little bit more to some of these trends that you're seeing that are sticking out in following the tracking of, you know, skills, skills based hiring. Love to hear more about that, what you're seeing and how that ties back to all of what we're talking about.  Mary Gatta: What we're seeing in our research for about the past two years now is that when we survey our employers, if they're using skills based hiring, almost two thirds of them say they are. They're using skills based hiring at some point in the recruiting process, 90% of those employers say they're using it at the interview stage, and two thirds say they're incorporating skills based hiring in the screening process. So another three quarters also said that they've developed skills based job descriptions, for example, and more than half use a kind of a skills based interview rubric. And then obviously assessments kind of play a role here too, that we know. And about 40% of our employers created internal assessment tools to assess skills, and another quarter or so use external created tools. So I think the skills based hiring. I mean, the fact that two thirds of our employers are saying they're using it at some point, shows it's really important, and it's really important that college grads, and that we help prepare college grads to be in an interview, in a have a resume and a cover letter that is focused around skills based hiring, right? And that incorporates those practices. And this ties also to what I said earlier about the decline of the GPA, right? So experiential learning is part of that right? Employers are looking for experiential learning. But also employers tell us that they really do want students to be able to articulate their skills and competencies, so and be that you know in their interview, be that through their descriptions, etc, through that a work portfolio. That is really important. Another, you know, critically important thing that employers are telling us to be helping prepare students and college grads for that will help give that, get them prepared, and give that and for it like up.  Julian Alssid: So then, how do these trends kind of shape the advice and the guidance that nice provides, you know, career services professionals and students and employers.  Mary Gatta: Yeah. So I think our resource is helpful, you know, across the board, right? So when we're able to get our data, whether it be around skills based hiring the GPA from employers, higher ed career service centers, faculty, staff, etc, are able to then incorporate that into their workshops, into their curriculum in the classroom, right? So having that knowledge of what employers are looking for from amongst college grads will help them maybe adapt syllabi, for example, to align course outcomes with competencies, career readiness competencies, right? So the students can then kind of share with a prospective employer. You know, in my sociology course, for example, I was able, I learned sociology and theory and methods, but I also developed critical thinking skills by engaging in a research project. Or I developed, I worked in teamwork on a group project on X, so that data is really important. The data also from our student survey. For example, we ask our students, what are they looking for in jobs, like, what are the benefits they're looking for? What are the attributes of the job, you know. And overall, our data shows they're looking for economic security type benefits, right, job security, for example. So that helps to inform employers right when they're recruiting students on what the graduates are looking for and what college grads are looking for. So that is really, I think, helpful. I think what's exciting about our early career talent survey, for example, is for the first time, we were able to kind of look at, you know, in, you know, in a self reported way. Obviously, all the data from students is self reported. But how, for the data around experiential learning, for example, how we're able to see a correlation between taking or participating in experiential learning opportunities during your college years and the impact on your early career. And that's informative for students. That's informative for parents to talk with their students, to talk with their children about. So I think that's really also helpful. And, you know, we also have, you know, compensation guides, for example, internship compensation guides that are helpful for employers to sort of gauge, you know, intern pay. We do a salary survey every year, and I should say, our first destination survey, which is the survey that we have on, what are, what are the outcomes six months out, that is open to the public, so that is not behind a paywall at NACE. And you can, we have a dashboard, and you can filter that by type of, you know, type of school region, the northeast, the southeast, etc, the west. And that can also help you think about by major. So it gives you, gives students, it gives, you know, everyone really a sense of, you know, how, what are the outcomes across different whether it's geographic variables, types of Carnegie classifications, etc. So I think you know, college outcome data is really important, because obviously it helps to inform a student's decision about their major, their career path, but it also helps inform both employers and higher ed professionals about the each other, right? Because they're both really important part of the college recruiting.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely Mary, and I think it's really interesting to hear you talk about how kind of some of these shifts that are happening, like, for example, when you raise skills based hiring or an emphasis on internships, I'm curious to know. I mean, given your years in this space, what are some of the trends you've kind of seen shift pretty significantly over time. And in addition, I mean, you know, what are those shifting? Because when you've seen those things shift over time, what does that make you think about future state, you know, where we are now and where we're headed?  Mary Gatta: One of the things, I think, is, and it's something we're working on at NACE, is really engaging faculty in these conversations, connecting career services and faculty more directly. We do know from our student survey that students go to their faculty for career advice. You know, speaking as a former faculty member, you know, we need to help ensure that our faculty are able to connect the amazing work that we're doing in the classroom in our disciplinary area with careers, right? And that work, you know, really requires us not to really change our syllabi significantly in any way, but, or what we're teaching differently in any way, but what it really does, it just kind of overlay on, you know, what are the I'm learning these sociological skills, right? Or I'm learning these skills in biology, but what, how does it, how do I help my students translate that to in an interview? How do I help my students connect that? How do I engage in some type of experiential learning with my students in the classroom on that? So I think we are seeing more and more, you know, the importance of that right? Students are saying they're going to their faculty for advice, and last year, we did a survey with the Society for Experiential Education and AAC&U on faculty who said both students and alumni are coming to them for career advice. So I think that's an important trend that we need to continue to provide the support and the professional development for faculty and career services to connect and work together collaboratively, so that faculty have the knowledge and the resources to help students on this. And I think that's something that we're seeing, you know, really good shifts on, I mean, in in our work. And, you know, faculty, like everyone in higher ed, I think really wants their students to succeed. That's the goal, right? That's why we're here, right? We want to ensure that our students succeed when they leave school. So I think that that's a really positive trend that I hope will continue.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely.  Julian Alssid: Mary, so with those discussions with faculty, to what degree are they touching on the whole notion of skills based approaches? I mean, that's a really big kind of crosswalk, I think, for many colleges, and very challenging.  Mary Gatta: So one of the first ways that we've been working with faculty and is just to help folks look at their syllabi, like look at their classes, and look at it from not only the lens of their discipline and the learning outcomes, but also the lens of like, our NACE career readiness competencies, right and aligning, like, just doing a very basic alignment of the learning outcomes that I already have in my course, and how do they align to one of our eight NACE competencies: critical thinking, technology, diversity, equity, inclusion, teamwork, etc, and then just kind of framing that in the classroom more. That's all it really involves. When I was when I taught in sociology, one of the things I would do in aligning those competencies is when I would then assign an assignment that I would talk about not only how the assignment was tied to what learning sociological research methods or sociological theory, but also how does it connect to just career readiness competencies that employers are looking for. A simple another simple way of doing that is having to send a very low stakes kind of point, low stakes on a paper, for example, where students write a paragraph reflecting how I worked on this sociology paper can also be connected to what are the skills that I learned broadly around career readiness, and then just helping students make those connections, because employers, you know, tell us the competencies, I mean, our career in his competencies are important, right? And they're looking for that in recent college grads.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So I feel like you're bringing us in this direction, Mary, but what are your recommendations for how our audience can become forces in applying your research findings to shape the future of higher ed and the future of higher ed and employer collaborations.  Mary Gatta: Think our research is really helpful in being able to get a strong landscape of what is happening in colleges, what students are saying, and want and what employers are saying in the recruiting cycles. So I would recommend being able to, depending where you're sitting, right, what, what lane you're sitting, being able to kind of connect that. So if you're in higher ed, I would recommend you know, checking out our job outlook, checking out our recruiting benchmarks, for example, so that you get a sense of, what is it that that employers are looking for? How are they reading the different competencies and importance in the and and proficiency of recent college grads? If you are an employer, our student survey, I think, is really helpful, because it gives you a sense of what your you know, your soon to be employees, your soon to be peers are, are thinking about in terms of their what they've been their college experience, how they think about networks, how they think about mentoring, what they're looking for in a job. If you're a college student, I think that our first destination survey is really helpful for you to get a sense of the college outcomes our early career talent is really helpful in order to get a sense of... We have data now from students who are one to 10 years out, what's their experience like? What, what has been helpful so, and we'll have a series, we're having a series of articles come out on that over the next few months. So I think really, because we're fortunate to be able to serve both the industry recruiters and the higher ed community and have them both participate in our research. I think we can, you know, we're able to kind of provide that data for folks. So I would recommend reviewing the data.  Julian Alssid: So Mary, how can our listeners learn more and keep following your work.  Mary Gatta: Yeah, absolutely. Well, certainly. You know, checking out our website and our social media, we're very active on LinkedIn, for example. So checking that out, I should say we are a membership organization. So if you are in the field and want to join NACE, we do more than just research. We do professional development. We have a conference every year that is coming up in June in Philadelphia, and we do that annually. We have a virtual conference in addition to the in person conference, and we also have many, many webinars and symposia throughout the year, both in person and virtual formats. So I would definitely recommend checking us out online.  Julian Alssid: Sounds like it's a lot more research too - a lot more access to the research, for your members.   Mary Gatta: Yeah. Julian Alssid: Cool. Well, thank you so much for taking the time. Really appreciate it.  Mary Gatta: Thank you for having me. Yes.  Kaitlin LeMoine   Thank you so much, Mary. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Shawn VanDerziel, President and CEO of the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE), kicks off a special three-part series exploring the crucial intersection of higher education and industry. Drawing on his extensive experience in HR and recruitment, VanDerziel discusses how the evolving economy is reshaping entry-level hiring practices and the growing importance of skills-based recruitment. He highlights the challenges facing both employers and higher education institutions, including the "language gap" that prevents students from effectively articulating their skills to employers. VanDerziel also examines how AI is transforming both recruitment strategies and career services, drawing employers back to campus recruiting while offering new opportunities for understaffed career offices. The conversation offers practical strategies for helping students translate their academic experiences into workplace-relevant skills, ultimately strengthening the vital bridge between post-secondary education and meaningful employment. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Julian. We've spent a lot of time on this podcast exploring the connections between higher ed and industry. Among many topics, we've discussed experiential learning, skills based education, business, higher ed partnerships and the impact of AI. We've examined how colleges are continuing to adapt to workforce needs and how innovative collaborations are aligning academic programs with evolving career opportunities.  Julian Alssid: That's right Kaitlin, and we're excited to share that we've partnered with the National Association of Colleges and Employers, or NACE, for a special three part mini series focused on a really critical piece of the higher ed-industry connection.  Kaitlin LeMoine: For our listeners who may be less familiar, NACE is the leading professional organization for career services and university relations and recruiting professionals. As described on their website, NACE empowers and connects the community of professionals who support, develop, and employ the college educated workforce.  Julian Alssid: This series will examine the work happening at the crucial intersection of learning and work in three parts. First, we'll discuss the broader landscape surrounding college career services and recruiting. Then we'll explore NACE's latest research, including projections for the class of 2025, and finally, we'll look at how leading colleges and employers are putting these insights into practice. To kick off today's conversation, we're honored to be joined by Shawn VanDerziel, President and CEO of NACE.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Shawn, thanks so much for joining us today. We're excited to have you on this podcast.  Shawn VanDerziel: Well, thanks for inviting us. I'm excited to be here with you all.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So, Shawn, as we jump in today, can you please give us some background on yourself and what led you to NACE.  Shawn VanDerziel: Sure I've had a windy road to my current position. I'm going to start back way back into college and move quickly through my career, so you can see the perspective by which I approach my work. I graduated from a large state school with my undergraduate and had no idea what I was going to do with my degree, and I had an opportunity to move to Chicago afterwards, which was a great move for me. And I found my first position working in college admissions, student enrollment, which was a natural for me, because in college, I was one of those overly involved students. I was a first generation student, so I didn't have the same resources as as many others may have had, and and wasn't quite sure how to approach my job search, etc, but I knew some things from my college experience, such as like giving campus tours, working with the admissions office, leading student groups, and I found my way into admissions. It was a great way to start my career. Worked my way up, and I got really burned out, and but what can I do? I was so tired of traveling all the time, being up until 10 o'clock at night, going to college fairs at high schools, all of those things. And so I thought, how can I transition these skills into something else? And I thought about recruiting, recruiting employees. So I was recruiting students. Why couldn't I recruit employees? And I found an organization that was really interested in me because of my connection to college students. They were very interested in connecting with college students to their employment opportunities. It was the first time that an outsourced service. Well, I should say, Fortune 500 company, utilized a outsourced service to fully take over the recruitment function. And so I worked for a company called Norrell Corporation, which was a billion dollar staffing company at the time, and we took over Bank of America's recruiting function for their Midwest region because they were expanding banks. So they were opening over 100 banks throughout the Chicagoland area in a period of about a year and a half. And I started as the recruitment manager, hiring all of these folks who are going to work in these banks, particularly through their management trainee programs and for tellers. And they wanted college students to be involved with that. So I was back on college campuses, looking for those students. Well again, I got really burned out, and I was like, Oh my gosh, this is the i being an outsourced service is a no joke kind of job. And I thought again, like, how can I transition this? And I already had the recruitment experience. I had always wanted to work at a museum, and finally, I had the skill to actually do something in a museum, and that was to work in a human resources office within a museum which is very niche, but I found a job and that I could apply for, and I actually got the job. And so I spent almost 25 years at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, which is one of the world's largest natural history museums, and I worked my way up from a human resources rep doing recruitment and employee relations to becoming the Chief Human Resources Officer, Chief of Staff. And I oversaw lots of different departments over time, including our IT department, our education department, marketing for a short while, and also oversaw our Board of Trustees and the functions related to that. While I was at The Field Museum, I built a really large internship program that included over 200 interns every summer. And that experience led me to NACE, the National Association of Colleges and Employers as a volunteer, I became a volunteer leader and eventually the Chair of the Board of NACE. Over a decade ago, when the executive director of NACE was about to retire, I became a part of the search process, and was lucky enough to actually be offered the job at the end of that executive search process. So five years ago, I started as this President and CEO of NACE, and am so delighted to be representing this organization to the world.  Julian Alssid: Always so great to hear peoples' origin stories. And so tell us a bit more about NACE. So give us an overview, if you will, Shawn and and then the role that nice really plays at the sort of intersection of higher ed and industry. Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, simply put, that's exactly what we do. We bridge post secondary education to employment. We're all about outcomes and equitable outcomes for all students who pursue post secondary education. What that means on a day to day basis is that we are a membership association that represents folks who work on college campuses, mostly in the career services offices. So we represent every type of college and university, small, large, private, public, community college, four year, you name it, that's about two thirds of our members. One third of our members are the employers who go into college campuses and recruit college students for employment opportunities, for full time internships, co ops, apprenticeships, you name it, the full gambit of opportunities. We represent close to 3,000 organizations, and over 17,000 almost 18,000 individuals are a part of the association.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Wow. Yeah. So this is, this is an extensive operation you have going on, and I would imagine, thank you. Thank you for the background you provided, because it just feels like, wow, you're drawing on, I'm sure, all the different skills and experiences gathered over the years, especially both on the college recruitment side and then on the employer recruitment side as well. It's quite striking.  Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, it's a lot of fun. And one of the things that on important work, really important work. And we're not insular, so meaning, like we just don't do things for our members. We do things for the public at large, so that they understand what's happening with the outcomes of students. So at the center of everything that we do is research. We're a knowledge based organization, so we're able to study the employment market from a variety of perspectives. We can see what's happening at college campuses to prepare students for employment opportunities. We can talk with students about what they're looking for in their jobs and how they're being prepared for jobs in their careers, and we talk to the employers about what they're looking for and how those other two pieces need to evolve to meet the growing and demanding needs of the workplace of the future.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Amazing. So with all that being said, given the rapidly shifting environment that we're currently operating in this very dynamic space, we'd love to dive into a couple of different areas that you just that you mentioned, and that NACE raised recently as part of a recent more environmental scan. I believe you posted about it on LinkedIn not too long ago. So one question we have is, first, how do you see the current economy and economic outlook reshaping how employers are hiring entry level talent, and how, with a different lens how colleges are preparing those learners for success as well.  Shawn VanDerziel: What we know right now is that the employment market is contracting so there are fewer opportunities for college graduates to join the workforce as compared to, let's say, two or three years ago, and that is from general full time employment all the way through to internships. With that we also know that employers are continually telling us that there's a gap between what college students offer and what they're looking to hire. So they have, they have made a bunch of shifts in their hiring and how they hire, which is no different than the general employment landscape. So we keep hearing about skills based hiring. Well, this has caused employers, particularly with early talent to really focus on that skills based hiring. So what they're saying is, is that in the old days, they would look at students who had a particular major, and they would look to see what their grade point average is as a starting place for the hiring process, and today, they're telling us for some jobs, we will do that, particularly highly technical jobs that require technical skills. So if you're going to be an engineer, Well, you certainly don't want someone working on your airplane who didn't get good grades, right? So you want to know that they're the top of their class because they have the knowledge to do the job. So they might still be screened by GPA. But if I'm looking for someone who's going into a management trainee program of some sort, that's more of a generalist or etc, I might think a little bit more broadly. I don't necessarily have to have someone who has the highest GPA. What I want is someone who has the skills and competencies to do the job. So how am I then going to find that person? Well, I have to substitute something in there to screen that person by we know from talking to employers that work experiences in general are very important to them. So anytime a student can demonstrate work experiences, and they can list what they actually gained in skill or competency in that work is super important, and they look for internship experience, either internship experience with them as their that student's employer, or they look for industry experience. So did the person have an internship in something that's closely aligned? And those are the students that they're saying they probably have the skills to do the job. They're also, of course, doing things like keyword searches and and using AI as part of part of the recruitment process. But they're really trying to dig down to find students who are going to succeed long term, and that's also one of the reasons that they invest so much money, particularly large companies, into internship programs, because we know that internship programs are the number one return on investment for employers from a recruitment perspective, the cost value is there for them. They know that they can convert at least 50% of those interns into being full time employees. They know that when they hire that student who starts as an intern, they're going to be with the company, more likely a year later and more likely five years later. We know that we've got that that data data to back it up, so the return on investment is really there. So we're finding more and more interest from employers and and partnering with schools to make sure their internship programs are solid. We're also finding that they are returning to campus, so they've been doing hiring on the web for quite some time. They've been focusing on it virtually, but they're also finding a need to get back in person so that they can weed through some of the talent a little bit more quickly.  Julian Alssid: That's so interesting that they're they're coming back.  Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, absolutely. And AI has a lot to do with that, and we certainly can talk more about AI and how that's impacting everything, but there's an impersonalization that's happening, and there really is a business case for for getting back on campus and finding that talent.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, so before we go into AI, which definitely we want to hear more about, it's all the rage, as you may have heard, interested to talk a little bit more about the skills based practices, because there's been some written about how...  The Burning Glass Institute and Harvard Center on Workforce wrote a piece a few months ago, which, of course, could be ancient history at this point, that companies were not picking up so much on on skills based practices. And so I'm interested to hear your take on that. You know, I get it with respect to the jobs where they're they are looking for skills. But how is it? Are they integrating this more broadly into their organizations? Are you seeing that?  Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, it's a really interesting question. So employers in our surveying do say that they, the majority of them, are doing some type of skills based hiring. Where they are doing it is either through keyword searches as an example, in screening the resumes through automated systems or the the other bulk is through behavioral based interviewing questions. So when a student actually lands an interview, being able to talk through with them what they have actually accomplished, and what they have the ability to be able to do based upon the skills and competencies that they've gained. And so by providing those concrete examples, they're able to kind of dig through that. But it also goes back to what I was mentioning just a few minutes ago, which is around they're kind of substituting when they say skills based hiring, what we say academically doesn't necessarily match what employers are doing logistically. There's always this gap between industry and higher ed and the language. And this is a really good example. And so when, from an academic perspective, we think of skill, we think, well, gosh, you're looking for someone who has great verbal speaking skills, right? You can do public speaking. Okay, great. So then, how do you screen for that? Well, what are those employers going to do to find that they're not going to put a test in place to have every candidate come through and do some kind of speech, right? That's not what they're going to do to get to that skill. What they're going to do is they're going to look on that resume and say, oh, gosh, did this student have an internship? And in that internship, did they use their verbal communication skills? Did they designate that on there? So if that skill is not listed, the employer isn't going to find it as a starting place, and then they're not going to be able to dig deeper on it when they get them into an interview. So this comes full circle to what's happening on campuses and preparing students to be career ready, and bridging that employment because we have an onus in higher education with these students to help them to articulate their skills and their competencies in a way that an employer can translate it and employers speak a totally different language. They want the shortcut. They want to get to the candidate in the fastest way possible. So they are going to put any mechanism in place to do that. And so it behooves us to help those graduates to be able to articulate it in every which way, all of the experiences that they have, right? So it doesn't even have they can come from unexpected ways. It could come from student activities. It could come from work study. It could come from a whole variety of places that a student may have obtained skills and competencies throughout their college career.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, it's really interesting to hear you talk about the language gap that exists Shawn and kind and the difference between, you know, maybe how, on the academic side, we describe a skill, and then the shortcut language that employers might use, I feel like that's, that's an area that we've I feel like has, you know, it's been around for for so long now, and it feels like there's just, there's more and more great work happening around how to close that gap. And you know, I think that if we're going to turn to the conversation of AI, it seems like there's some really interesting work there that might be able to support some of the closing of those gaps. But then there's also some new challenges that emerge as well. So would love to transition over to talk a little bit more about AI and how what you're seeing from the perspective of both use on the employer side with respect to recruitment and hiring, and also when we think about career services and preparing learners for really bridging that gap between post secondary and employer. Where is AI, you know, used well, where is it less effective? And you know, where do we still have work to do?  Shawn VanDerziel: I'll start with the employers. So as I mentioned earlier, employers are using it for screening, most definitely, and they've been doing that for a long time, using various AI technologies to help them  screen resumes. But an interesting thing is happening right now, which is because of the explosion of AI, there are some employers that are seeing an explosion of resumes hitting them, and because of these bots that are out there, and there are fake candidates that are hitting employers by the hundreds of thousands. And there are job seekers who are literally sending out thousands of resumes at a time. And so when that happens, an employer is put at a disadvantage, because now they have for one opening, or let's call it, two openings, they have 10,000 candidates. So there's a real challenge there for them to screen all of those resumes and to really find the top candidates to come out of that and to really give the right people the right chance, right and so it's a tough predicament to be in, and that's one of the reasons employers are actually thinking about going back to campus, in larger numbers coming up here because they started to deploy a strategy over the last few years of virtual recruiting, which was successful for them, where they were more agnostic about the campus by which they were recruiting from. And now, because of the influx of AI, they are rethinking this, and they're saying, hey, I need to get to candidates differently. I need to know that they're legit candidates. I need to be able to talk to some people and and so I may actually go back and do target schools again, and go on to select school campuses, which then, of course, creates more competition among the schools. So it's this vicious circle that ends up happening, but again, those employers are looking to get to the candidates in the most efficient and effective way possible. On the college side, AI has great promise, particularly for those understaffed career services offices, which are the majority of career service offices on campuses these days. If we're about career outcomes, we need to be investing in career services. But unfortunately, the investment hasn't been made on most campuses. AI can play a really pivotal role in helping to expand the services that a college can offer. It's not going to solve the issues, but more students can be reached, maybe more efficiently. So bots can be deployed to answer basic questions, the staff can direct the learners to resources that are can help them write their resumes, figure out other types of industries or jobs that the student may have the skills to do, to do career exploration, the list goes on and on, and then the career services staff can really dive deep with students in quality work, in one on one work, doing really meaningful work, and helping to set that student up for career success, around the articulation of skills, around targeting of certain employers, thinking broadly about the application of what they've learned, and so it could make a difference long term. But of course, we're at the beginning of it all.  Kaitlin LeMoine: It's interesting to hear you talk about how the use of AI in the in career services offices can actually get career services professionals back to like, maybe like, the core of their work, and what's the most important to their work. And it's interesting. Julian, I feel like we're we've heard some of that about like, well, what are the benefits? What are the benefits of AI? And this is a great example of one space where it's like, maybe it means that the professionals themselves can get back to like what is most critical, and then some of the other, perhaps time consuming, but maybe less impactful work can be automated or supported in other ways. I find that really interesting. And then just the one other thing I wanted to mention is, I think it's, it's really interesting to hear like, it's like, there's progress there, and then it's interesting to hear on the employer side, almost a return to previous practice. And what is that, you know, what does it look like to adjust their like hiring practices now, with this new reality of, you know, kind of endless numbers of resumes and trying to determine what's real and what's not, and how to really assess the skills and abilities of applicants. Really, some really interesting tensions there.  Shawn VanDerziel: That's right. One of the things that we're not finding, though, is that students are getting the AI experiences they need to prepare them. So that's yet another dimension that we need higher education working on with students, but we also need the employers. We found in one of our research pieces last year that very few students, less than 10% actually were asked to use AI skills in their internship, which is so surprising, because you would think that companies who are saying there's a future with AI that this entry level group of folks coming into their company could help them to explore it.  Could help to experiment with it. Could bring these new skills to them, yet the students themselves didn't use the technology when they were in their internship, so I hope to see that change as well.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, so we really are at the beginning, and as you said, Shawn, of so much of this, and I guess for our audience, which kind of represents both sides of this, as well as the providers, the companies that are also trying to support this work, what are some practical steps that educators, employers and folks who want to work with, you know them, can take to really design the kind of nimble and adaptable, you know, skills focused education and some of the kind of, you know, exemplar recruitment practices you're talking about   Shawn VanDerziel: As you mentioned, there are some really practical things that can be done that are super simple, and that's thinking about a learner holistically when they come into a college or university, and all of the touch points that they have and all of the experiences that They might go through from the curriculum in the classroom, the projects that they do in the classroom, the student activities, the work study, the part time jobs, the list goes on and on that these are all learning experiences that we know add value to the college graduate experience and why college graduates are so valuable to the future of work. However, these learners aren't able to articulate all of those experiences to translate them to the work world. That's a problem. So they don't give themselves credit for that student activity that they just participated in, that classroom project that they did, where they were the leader of their group, where they analyzed all kinds of data to get to an answer or something, where they did a classroom presentation and had to articulate the results of it, where they then and had to work in a team and collaborate with a team of folks that were difficult to work with because they came from all over, all different disciplines, etc, etc, right? So, like, that's one example where skills and competencies were built, yet students aren't taking credit for it, and the reasons that they're not taking credit for it, for what how that applies to the work world, is that we're not helping them to make that connection, that it is real world, what they just did. And so that's a simple example of just taking the step with these learners to help them to understand how what they just did applies to the world of work. It may seem elementary, but it's needed, and it's going to make a huge difference in these students lives. And then ta da, the employers see it, right, and then they hear it, they're more quick, able to quickly identify that these students actually do have the skills and the competencies to do the job that they're looking to fill.  Julian Alssid: You're getting right at that very basic translation language problem we've been talking about.  Shawn VanDerziel: That's exactly right.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thanks so much for joining us in today's conversation. Shawn, this has been really fascinating, and really appreciate you taking on a couple of really big, big questions with lots of nuance embedded in them. So as we close out today's conversation, how can our listeners learn more about you, about NACE, and continue to follow your great work?  Shawn VanDerziel: Yeah, there are a number of ways. The first thing I would suggest is that you follow us on LinkedIn. So look up National Association of Colleges and Employers, and we post regularly, like every day, multiple times a day, statistics, interesting tidbits related to all of this work that everyone can join in on. So even just to be a lurker, that is a great place to hear what's happening in this college to career pipeline. I would also invite you to if you belong to a university or college, to see if you already have a membership with NACE, and if there's a possibility of you being added to the membership role so you're regularly kept up to date. But certainly go to our website at naceweb.org. And we have a ton of stuff there for free, for everybody, again, for the general public to be able to understand what's happening in this world, because we see that as our job to strengthen employment outcomes for all learners well.  Julian Alssid: Thank you so much for joining us, Shawn and and we look forward to continuing with this conversation with your colleagues and taking deeper and deeper. Really appreciate you taking this on.  Shawn VanDerziel: It's been so great having this conversation with you all, and happy to come back anytime.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. Thank you so much. We really appreciate it. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Ellie Bertani, President and CEO of GitLab Foundation, discusses the foundation's unique approach to philanthropy that prioritizes ROI, risk-taking, and speed to support economic mobility initiatives. Drawing from her cross-sectoral experience in nonprofit, public, and private sectors, Bertani explains how the foundation measures impact by tracking how every dollar invested aims to generate at least $100 in additional lifetime earnings for people living below a living wage. She shares success stories from a portfolio of over 120 grants across Colombia, Kenya, and the United States, highlighting investments in areas like green jobs, short-form credentials, and technology infrastructure. Bertani also discusses their Learning for Action Fund, which helps grantees build monitoring and evaluation capacity, and offers practical advice for nonprofits on becoming more outcomes-focused through agile, data-driven approaches to program design and implementation. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Julian Alssid: On the workforces podcast. We feature a range of companies and organizations offering various programs, products, and initiatives that live at the nexus of work and learning. Some are funded through public dollars, other through private investments, and we don't always dive into those details in our conversations. However, today we're taking a slightly different approach and speaking directly with the leader of a foundation that's focused on supporting a range of innovative organizations seeking to solve significant challenges. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, Julian, we're looking forward to this conversation. The mission of the GitLab Foundation is to improve lifetime earnings through access to opportunities by supporting organizations in a number of different focus areas. The Foundation seeks to have impact in three different geographic regions, Colombia, Kenya and the United States. The foundation's focus on ROI is particularly distinct. They pay close attention to how their dollars contribute to the total lifetime earnings for low income families.  Julian Alssid: Yes, and at a time in which we're navigating significant change in the world of work and learning from policy shifts, economic uncertainty, the rapid advancement of AI, we're looking to dive deep into a conversation with the President and CEO of GitLab Foundation, Ellie Bertani. We'll discuss how they monitor and measure impact and ensure that every dollar spent drives true and lasting change. Kaitlin LeMoine: With a background in the nonprofit, public and private sectors, Ellie brings a shared value cross-sectoral approach to drive sustainable impact. Prior to joining the GitLab Foundation, Ellie spent 10 years in the private sector with roles at Wells, Fargo and Walmart, and much of her work focused on frontline worker economic stability and mobility. Earlier in her career, Ellie spent nearly 10 years in the nonprofit and public sector, including positions with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the US, State Department, Third Sector Capital Partners and Rotary International. Ellie, thanks so much for joining us for today's conversation. We're so excited to have you with us.  Ellie Bertani: Oh, I'm so grateful for the invitation. It's great to be here. Julian Alssid: Yes, Ellie, thank you so much. And if you would tell us about your background and what led you to GitLab Foundation. Ellie Bertani: As you can tell, my background is a mix of 10 years in the nonprofit and philanthropic space early in my career, and then 10 years in the private sector, and I've really tried to combine perspectives of what makes each of those sectors impactful and what can contribute to drive social change into GitLab Foundation, as we have launched it and founded it two and a half years ago. I think in particular, we're trying to say, what are the most important factors that drive great investment in the private sector, some approaches from venture capital in particular, that we think, when translated into a philanthropic setting, can really help us make evidence based smart decisions, help us move really quickly as an organization, and help us find these really sort of diamonds in the rough jewels of projects or organizations that have great new ideas that can really help people who need economic mobility get money into their pockets and move up the ladder. Kaitlin LeMoine: So you're starting to take us in this direction, Ellie, but can you provide, I know we said a little bit about the GitLab Foundation, but can you know you provide more of a background on on an overview of the foundation, and really what makes your investment strategy unique?  Ellie Bertani: We are a global, independent, private foundation, as you said, working in three markets today. We have a mission to improve lifetime earnings through access to opportunities. And we really think about economic mobility pretty broadly. We think there are tremendous number of factors that can help support an individual to grow their earnings over time. Some of those supports may be skills development and workforce training programs. Some of those supports may be things like early education and earlier in their lives, their access to great opportunities at younger ages, and some of those may be access to technology solutions that can help them navigate or find new opportunities as they're working through their lives. But we really take I think there are three different things that make our investment approach a bit unique in philanthropy, first is our focus on ROI. Here we estimate and track the impact of every investment that we make using a unique what we call North Star return on investment methodology. That means for every dollar that we invest, we seek to drive at least $100 in additional lifetime earnings for people who live below a living wage. We seek out solutions that lead people to pathways to prosperity, and we recognize that it's really important to have financial stability as a foundation to drive economic mobility. The second thing that is a bit unique about us is we have a pretty high risk tolerance. We believe that philanthropy is in a unique position to take risk and test out new social innovations in a way that others, for example, the public sector, really can't, since they're using taxpayer dollars. And so building on that unique capability, we are willing to bet on unproven ideas and also to invest in our grantees' ability to build evidence of whether their ideas work, and also to learn through iteration how their ideas can be improved. And I think this, this ability to seek out risky projects, is something that we would encourage other philanthropies to do as well. And then the third thing that we do that is a bit different is we really move with speed. We believe in getting capital as quickly as possible to organizations who are driving change. That's why we've designed our processes to be as grantee friendly as possible, asking for just enough information to help inform our decision making and make some good bets. And this, I think, is demonstrated by the fact that over our first two years, we've made over 120 grants and moved almost $35 million quickly to high potential ideas. So that's what really, I think makes this difference. Julian Alssid: Well, so Ellie picking up on that. So you have this, you've developed rapidly, then pretty big portfolio. Well, how do you develop maybe a little bit more on that? And how do you then monitor this portfolio that is in different focus areas and has different kind of time and impacts horizons?  Ellie Bertani: How we develop the portfolio is very much sort of a building upon the scientific method. We lay out a series of hypotheses of what we think is important, what is driving the labor market? For example, in the United States, where do we see opportunity and growth, and where can we make bets in that space? So for example, last year, we made a lot of bets in the green jobs space, as you might imagine, when there was significant industrial policy and investments in the CHIP and IRA acts that were really fueling growth in the energy sector and other sectors. So where we think we can make a good bet and also see the potential maybe to leverage other dollars, government dollars or other foundation dollars, we think we'll get a higher return on investment, that's one example. We're also making a pretty big bet in the short form credential market, college degrees aren't for everyone. Lots of people are turning towards shorter form training programs, as you all know quite well, but there's not yet a lot of evidence for which of those programs are the best, which deliver skills that employers are really seeking, which will really drive increased income for people. And so we're actually investing in helping make that market have a clear signal of value. That is to identify which programs are actually the best. And we've made some big investments in in that work. But that's all built on this hypothesis that if we can solve that problem, it will really drive earnings for potentially millions of people here in the United States. So that's a little bit about how we develop our portfolio around certain hypotheses that we will learn over time if they're working or not. In terms of monitoring our portfolio of projects, I think again, what makes us a little bit unique is, first, we work directly with grantees to tailor grant requirements, because we see economic mobility as having lots of inputs, lots of ways to drive improvements. Some programs maybe one year long, and we'll be able to build something quickly and see results quickly. Often, technology projects are like this, you can really see quickly if they're working or not. Sun like skills training programs take multiple years to understand if they're working or not. And so we we adjust the time periods, the amounts given, etc, and try to be very flexible with our grantees, allowing them also to adjust mid project if they need to go in a new direction, and then for monitoring and evaluation. You know, most funders don't support their grantees in efforts to measure their impact. We understand that those investments are important, that it can be complex, costly and high effort to conduct robust impact measurement. And so we actually. Have a fund supporting grantees to do just this. We launched it last year. It's called our Learning for Action Fund, and in its first iteration, and invested in 12 grantees from our portfolio to build their monitoring and evaluation capacity to both improve their own program designs by capturing feedback from their participants and allowing them to iterate their programs and to build evidence for what's working. And we are hopeful that as grantees, are able to build that evidence and prove what's working that will inspire other funders beyond us also to invest in some of this great work. Kaitlin LeMoine: You know, I'm struck by how responsive the foundation is, it sounds like to the needs and kind of priorities of the different organizations that you invest in. I mean, both from, like, the tailoring of, like you said, some of, I guess, how people even, like apply for these, these funds, but also, and like, the kind of things they're looking to achieve once they've obtained the funds. But also this, this focus on monitoring impact, right? Because I think, like in this space, that can be really challenging and doesn't always have a short time horizon associated with it, depending on the initiative or the program. So I mean, I'm curious, Ellie, can can you share a couple of examples of grantees that are demonstrating impact, and then maybe we can dive into some of the challenges and learnings you're seeing as well. Ellie Bertani: Two organizations that I wanted to highlight that I think are great examples of really interesting, unique, high ROI projects that we're excited about. So the first is an organization you may know called Upwardly Global. Upwardly Global is an organization here in the United States that helps immigrants translate their skills from prior jobs or careers from their home countries to to re credential them and allow them to employ those skills here in the United States, as you probably recognize, there are a lot of barriers when someone is immigrating, and often, many immigrants end up in rather low wage jobs like house cleaner jobs or Uber drivers or things they can quickly get to sustain their families, but aren't harnessing everything they have brought with them from their prior life and upwardly global really helps people go through the process of re credentialing, demonstrating those skills, pointing them towards the right programs that will allow them to then join the workforce in a much more productive way. So they're already doing great work. Upwardly global came to us saying, we really have this vision of expanding our work to serve more and more refugee serving agencies across the United States. What we want to do is kind of some what I would call unsexy infrastructure work. We want to build a learning management system so that we can codify all the work we do and train other organizations to do it, which would dramatically expand our reach across the United States to serve more and more people. And other funders hadn't been willing to make this investment, but we saw, based on how we model and analyze grant potential return on investment, that this was going to be a really high leverage investment and really drive many more people to have higher income. So we made the bet. They implemented the system. We have seen great results as of this work continuing, we've estimated that this will contribute to increasing annual income per person of the program by about $19,000 so really high returns for the investment we made. The second one I would call out is one of our grantees in Colombia called Kuepa EduTech. So cuepa has recognized that in Colombia there's a growing demand for hospitality and services because of the growing ecotourism and tourist industry, and we invested in a pilot program to help low income students be trained in these programs, to provide personalized coaching and to iterate a program so that other funders would come along and grow it over time, we've seen great success In this program, showing that, in some cases, the graduates are now doubling their earnings from below living wage there to over $6,000 a year per person, which is significantly above living wage in Columbia. And so, you know, we estimate that for only about $1,000 we will drive more than double increases to their lifetime earnings over time. So really, again, a really high return on investment now in terms of learnings, right? So I'll give one example of a grantee that you know, we invest in risky things. So many things don't work out. We see about two thirds of our prod. Projects, if we're doing a really good job or panning out as we had hoped, about 1/3 may not be, and that's to be expected. What we really look for, though, is these grantees who are learning and iterating as they go. So we invest in generation Kenya. Generation is a multi national organization that focuses on increasing skills, country by country across the world, and in Kenya, they launched this, really at the time, very innovative project, to help Kenyans, particularly in urban areas, gain skills, to be to have technical skills, and become freelance, digital freelancers in the open marketplace, the theory being, if they could then be employed by Americans, for example, their earnings would be significantly higher than if they were working for local and local jobs that are relatively poor paying with the continuing push into AI and the rapid changes the technology space, what originally seemed like a really exciting, high potential program over the first year ran into some significant challenges with the second and third cohorts gaining employment. The first cohort did great. The second and third really faced some significant challenges, and so they were forced. The grantee came to us and said, we think we should stop the program. We think we should save the funds and reallocate them to some higher potential initiatives. And we said, Thank you. Thank you for coming to us. Thank you for raising this as an issue. Thank you for recognizing this challenge. We were happy to see them pivot the strategy and repurpose the funds quickly and recognize the challenges they were facing. So, so all this to say, you know, this is a normal course of things. When you're making a high risk investments. What we really look for is the learnings and the ability of flex and pivot. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I would say that, you know, I appreciate like, Thank you for sharing that that set of lessons learned. And I think you know having some of that story is is on your website as well. And I think it's really valuable to put that out to the community, right to say, like, here's what happens. Like, it's not always like a linear path to success. Sometimes it's actually about yes, let's repurpose or let yes, we're learning along the way, and what can we do differently? And I think showing models of how that work happens is really important, because I think, as you're saying, right, more many times, that's what occurs, especially with a lot of these social impact initiatives. It's not a linear path to success, and it's and there are so many external factors impacting these projects along the way, absolutely. I mean, just in the last few months, we can see how external factors can change all sorts of dynamics for nonprofits and philanthropies trying to make bets. So as long as the leadership team is one that is recognizing learning, we're willing to continue investing and betting on those teams.  Julian Alssid: So Ellie, even in less tumultuous times, I'd say that the field has been littered with good ideas that have come and gone with grants. And I'm really interested in hearing a bit about how, how do you work with your grantees to, you know, to ensure that they're to try to give the best chance of life beyond this grant like, how do you leverage these investments in that respect? Ellie Bertani: Although we're young, we recognize that we would like to go beyond the check in terms of support to our grantees. And so with two of our three funds, currently, we have started implementing grantee cohorts and grantee support to those cohorts. So I'll give two examples of what that looks like today. We have an AI for Economic Opportunity Fund. We were one of the first foundations to invest in this space. And I say that not to toot our horn, but because we have learned a lot along the way since we started over two years ago, about what helps a grantee be successful when they're building a new technology, particularly a technology that it is itself evolving so quickly through our first cohort and our first fund, we were very fortunate to form early on a partnership with open AI, and that has really matured in the second cohort, to them offering engineering support for all of the grantees going through our second cohort, we host monthly meetings, bring all of the grantees together focused on a specific topic, each time, from topics ranging from ethical use of AI and building ethical frameworks for building and implementing AI in your own organization, all the way to highly technical conversations on, you know, rag and how do you set guard rails around your llms and, you know, things that I can't talk about even as intelligently as the rest of my team? Yeah. But and we use grant the grantees come in and bring a use case, a problem they're trying to solve, the engineers will help coach them in real time so everyone can learn collectively from that conversation. So we're seeing where we can bring in expertise to really support a cohort of grantees, and where they can learn collectively from each other, if you can build in those supports, it really goes a long way to making those projects as effective as possible. The second thing we're doing in that cohort and in others, is setting up demo days. Demo days work great for technical projects. They also work great for non technical projects, but allow it really bringing in other funders at the sort of capstone event at the end of a cohort, so be it six months or a year long, bringing in, you know, in some cases, 40 to 50 different funders to come and hear from the grantees about what is working, what may not be working, what have they learned, and what's the evidence? Can really get other funders excited and investing further in these programs, which we think is a huge benefit for the work, for impact and for these grantees. So those are a couple of ways we're thinking about it. You heard a little bit already about a Learning for Action Fund. We continue to believe it's critical to help grantees build their evidence base and build their M&E capabilities, because that itself allows them to communicate their work with such more data and detail that we think it really enhances their ability to thrive.  Julian Alssid: It's convening a lot of different conversations and resources, really, that's what we hope to do. So Ellie, what? This is a question we like to ask all our guests, what practical steps can our audience take to become forces in designing programs and solutions that demonstrate ROI and positively shape the future of work and learning?  Ellie Bertani: We at GitLab Foundation are on a mission to demonstrate that philanthropy and the nonprofit sector as a whole can be as outcomes based and accountable as private sector investors, we feel for that reason, we hope the sector can be clear on the outcomes in general that we all seek to achieve, not just focused on inputs, like how much dollars We grant out, which is often what we talk about, or on just the outputs, like how many people we touch and support, but really on the outcomes, have we moved the needle on improving how much money people are earning over their lifetimes? And that's not easy. We recognize it's complicated, but it's, we think incredibly valuable to stay focused on the end game. And in fact, we actually offer advisory services to other foundations, to individual philanthropists and to nonprofits that are seeking to become more outcomes oriented and ROI focus. So if any of your listeners want to learn about that, they can reach out to us, but we think that's just imperative for improving impact as a whole in the sector. In terms of specific strategies that we've seen often have a high ROI after our two years and then 120 plus grants, we do encourage funders to pay attention to some of those things I referenced before, these unsexy infrastructure grants, technologies that can help organizations become more cost efficient, more they extend their reach. Sometimes data systems, right? We live in an environment where being able to harness data and technology more and more is really what helps ideas scale, and that can often help a nonprofit supercharge its reach and growth. For nonprofits, hearkening back to some of my earlier comments, we just really advocate for agility and a learning approach. That's what we look for first and foremost, in a team that we're ready to grant to that includes sort of the mindset that the leadership team brings. Are they constantly collecting data? Do they have fast feedback loops from their clients that help them improve program design? Are they a test and learn organization that can do rapid prototypes right and put things out there. Those tend to be the most successful. We recognize some projects just failed. Failure is fine, as long as there's the ability to learn and adapt. But that's a mindset that just doesn't exist on every team, and it's something we we just think nonprofits really be be looking for in the talent that they recruit as well. Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you, Ellie, for those very...I think they are very practical steps as far as how our audience can become forces in this area. So as we wind down our conversation today, how can our listeners learn more about your work and the GitLab Foundation and continue. You to follow your efforts.  Ellie Bertani: Well, you can follow us on LinkedIn. You can look us up at GitLabfoundation.org. We actually have a newly launched newsletter on LinkedIn called Powering Progress. So if you can go to get lab foundation on LinkedIn, you can sign up for our newsletter. And then if you're interested in learning more about our modeling and measurement advisory services. You can reach us at measurement@GitLab foundation.org. Julian Alssid: Well, thank you so much. Ellie for for this conversation. It's it was. It was very grounded. I'm sure you're going to get lots and lots of visitors to your site, and hopefully lots and lots of more nimble, iterative-inclined nonprofits. Ellie Bertani: Well, I appreciate it. I want to say thank you to all your listeners. Thanks for you too, and for inviting me to come and be here today. I'm a big fan of Work Forces podcast, and it's just great to play a role. So thanks so much.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thanks so much for joining us. Ellie, it was a great conversation. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify, please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.

Kerry McKittrick, Co-Director of The Harvard Project on Workforce, shares research conducted in partnership with the National Governors Association on how governors are reshaping workforce development to address labor force challenges. She identifies key trends including agency mergers, stakeholder engagement, dual-customer approaches, innovative funding, and investments in wraparound supports for underrepresented populations. McKittrick highlights how states focus on industry partnerships in emerging sectors and emphasizes the importance of data-informed regional strategies. She explains how successful pilot programs using governor's reserve funds can lead to permanent state policies, offering practical guidance for practitioners to adapt research insights to local contexts. Julian Alssid:  Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  You know Julian, when we talk about and use the term workforce development, it can sound like we're talking about one system, but really it's an interconnected web, like set of systems. It's not just one thing.  Julian Alssid: A web is a good way to put it. You've got education and training programs, employer needs, government policies, economic data, new technologies and people seeking to advance their careers. So all these different pieces, and they're all influencing each other, you can't really address one without thinking about the others. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, exactly. It requires so much collaboration. Educators need to talk to employers. Policy makers need to listen to communities. And it's not just a top down function either. It's you need to you need input from the people going through the trainings and the workers trying to navigate their careers as well. Julian Alssid: Which is why I'm excited that we're talking with Kerry McKittrick today from the Harvard Project on Workforce. Kerry is helping to make sense of the work happening across these interconnected systems. Kaitlin LeMoine: The Harvard Project on Workforce is an interdisciplinary applied research project between the Harvard Kennedy School, the Harvard Business School and the Harvard Graduate School of Education that examines workforce development and the future of work from these various vantage points. In Kerry's role as co-director, she leads the project's policy, research, and partnership strategy, and spearheads initiatives focused on building better pathways to economic mobility. She has co-authored multiple papers focused on education, training and career navigation, and she speaks regularly about issues at the intersection of education and work. Julian Alssid: And prior to joining The Project on Workforce, Kerry was a senior manager at Jobs for the Future and served as a senior policy advisor on education workforce, civil rights and child welfare policy for Congressman Jim Langevin. She started her career in politics serving as a campaign manager for Massachusetts State Rep Ken Gordon. Thanks so much for joining us today. Kerry.  Kerry McKittrick: Thanks for having me. I'm a big fan of the podcast and excited to chat. Kaitlin LeMoine: We're excited to connect and chat with you today as well, Kerry. Thanks so much for joining us here. So as we jump in today, can you please tell us a bit more about your background and your role at The Project on Workforce? Kerry McKittrick: Absolutely. So I come from a political policy background, and it was actually through that work, through working with a congressman from Rhode Island, Jim Langevin, who really was interested in career and technical education, that my eyes were kind of opened to the workforce development and career and technical education world. And you know, I found it really interesting, because unlike many policy areas, it's pretty bipartisan. We were able to find some great agreements across Democratic sides and Republican sides and between employers and educators. Everyone sort of agreed that this type of approach was extremely necessary to both fill what was called at the time, you know, the skills gap, but also expand equity and so, you know, I did that work in Washington, got a little bit tired, as you may imagine. My, you know, my, my heart goes out to all the folks still doing this work. It's really amazing in Washington. But wanted to kind of dig deeper into the broader ecosystem. And as you were saying, really understand all of the different players and their roles and their unique levers for driving economic mobility. So I was fortunate to work at Jobs for the Future and now at The Project on Workforce. I'm thrilled to sit at the intersection of all of these players and try to make research accessible. So often I feel like research is on one side and practitioners are kind of on the other, and so it's important to ground the practice conversation in the evidence. And really, our mission is to build better pathways to economic mobility for workers and learners who haven't been served well by our systems in the past, and so we advance research on, you know, education and workforce transitions. We focus on the role of community colleges and regional economic development, the, I would say, role of career navigation supportsin economic advancement and workforce policy and education policy about the state and federal levels.  Julian Alssid: So Kerry, so you do indeed sit in the in the middle of it all, and which is, which is great, and your research coming out of the center has been out of the project has been quite, quite amazing. As we seek to remain kind of current on the, you know, on the future of work and learning, what are some of the trends you're seeing, and tell us about some of your most research and related findings.  Kerry McKittrick: I think that's a great question, because things are shifting pretty rapidly beneath our feet. And, you know, it's, it's a complex, complicated time to be doing this work. I think one of the things we're focused on at the project is really shifting workforce policy at the state level. And you know, we recently released a report focused on the role of governors in shaping workforce development systems, and we focused on governors because they have a unique position, both under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act from the federal level, as well as over the states agencies which we know workforce touches everything from education systems to economic development systems to child care and transportation, all of these issues are really interconnected, and governors have a unique ability to bridge those gaps, and so we wanted to understand, because there is a lack of research on this topic and on what states are doing at the workforce level. Wanted to understand what governors were focused on, what were their priorities, what are some of their strategies and processes that they're deploying as they try to address low labor force participation. And I call that out, because when we were interviewing governor's workforce advisors to do this research, 60% discussed low labor force participation as a key driving factor that was contributing to their workforce development strategy. And so I can go a little bit deeper, but I'll highlight five trends that we saw at the state level. The first is that organizational structures are shifting across states. So we're seeing, in a lot of cases, agencies being merged, whether that's education and workforce agencies or workforce and economic development, we're seeing new stakeholder driven engagement, stakeholder driven approaches to WIOA planning. So we asked about, you know, some of the Workforce Opportunity Act, I think the listeners know we owe is the acronym for that. But in many cases, you know, these are resource intensive processes, but states are really engaging with stakeholders and understanding both, both with employers, with industry associations, to really understand the challenges that they're facing. And then the third piece was this dual customer approach to workforce development, so serving both employers and individuals, both job seekers and job holders. And so I think you know, balancing that, that support between quality jobs and job demand, is something that came up in our interview, 75% of folks mentioned this is the tension they were addressing. And then the last two trends are really trying to address some of the challenges with WIOA funding, federal funding in general, coming up with creative approaches, using governor's reserve funds in innovative ways. And then the last is, you know, really investing in targeted training towards youth, towards underrepresented populations, like justice involved folks, and investing in wraparound supports. So 60% of the folks we talked to mentioned childcare as a really important component of a workforce development strategy, particularly in the wake of COVID, folks, we're seeing, you know, so many caregivers leaving the workforce. And right now, the challenge in many states is how to bring people back, and how to adopt this sort of whole of life, whole of government perspective, to workforce development.  Julian Alssid: So that's, that's a lot. It's a very, very you're what you're seeing. So it's very comprehensive, very systemic. It's, it's, it's great to know that states are moving in these directions. Are there priorities that are standing out among the kind of array of shifts you're seeing that cut across states, yeah. Kerry McKittrick: Yeah, that's a great point. I would say the industry partnerships really focusing on key sectors at the time that we were doing these interviews, which was during 2024 from April through December, folks were really focused on clean energy. They were focused on semiconductor manufacturing. A lot of these industries that actually were being targeted by the Biden administration for industrial policy. So we're seeing that states are really investing in industry as partners, in some cases, providing incentives for folks to hire underserved populations. In other cases, building, you know, kind of customized training programs. In other cases, this is a extremely, I think, promising practice, providing business navigators, so a point of contact for a business to help navigate the workforce system, which is not easy to do. So I think there are a lot of exciting, promising practices out there, and focusing on this drill customer approach is certainly something we're seeing become more of a trend. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, that makes so much sense. I'm wondering. Kerry, going back to one of the first things you said around the priorities you had mentioned, or the five trends, rather, you had mentioned agencies that are merging. And I was just curious to hear a little bit more about that. What are some of you know, kind of, what are you seeing merge, and what are the reasons for it, for those mergers to be occurring? Kerry McKittrick: So in some states, there's been efforts to merge education departments and workforce development departments. And in part, this makes it slightly easier to braid funding. So there are a lot of, you know, obstacles to braiding Perkins or education funding and workforce funding. But because workforce funds are so low, and we could have an hours on conversation about that, there's, you know, really a need to kind of be creative and berating funds. So that's kind of one piece. The other reason we saw was trying to build workforce pipelines that start at the youth level. So starting in K-12, with career and technical education, moving through community colleges up to workforce and community colleges starting to serve a real kind of integral role as upskilling institutions for their communities. So an effort to build these pipelines, one in four of the states we talked to mentioned youth apprenticeships as a priority. So merging these agencies helps folks to really improve the coordination across the board. And then I would say the other piece, the other emerging that we were seeing was, and this wasn't across the board, right? This was just, you know, several states was economic development or commerce with workforce, and this allowed for more business services to be integrated with workforce services, and a few of those that I just mentioned, but we're seeing, you know, one of the trends that I've observed is really the use of workforce policy as business engagement policy. Because businesses, you know, it's, it's far more than just, perhaps the tax incentive for moving to a specific area. It's really incentivizing workforce support and workforce investment, because this is what businesses need to and it's also helping states grow. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, well, and it's interesting to think, you know, to kind of hear these are the different ways that really, these different players are almost de siloing their efforts, right? Like, like you're saying about building that pipeline, what does it look like to build a an education and economic development pipeline, kind of like, K on up, right? Like, let's, let's start at the very beginning, and and all work together, kind of throughout and across these systems. So that's that's exciting to to hear you're seeing as, like, kind of an emerging trend in this space. Kerry McKittrick: Exactly. And I think another thing I'd add to that is career exploration becoming a bigger trend, especially at the youth level, and understanding that, you know, many people might not know what a career in semiconductor manufacturing is, I think I still don't. So for young people you know, to really have the opportunity to explore, to figure out, you know, this is something that could leverage my talents. This could be something I want to do. Is an effective and kind of exciting way to go, I would say, you know, one of the other things I would add around this career navigation and career support piece is the need for more career coaches. So in addition to the child's care, the child care trend, half of states mentioned career navigation or career coaching as a priority, both at the youth level but also at the adult level. But there's an acknowledgement that there's a massive shortage of coaches, and then the funding for for these support services is also pretty low.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah. I mean, I think we've seen in our work, like, it's almost like, there are all these new there's there's new industry, sub-industries within industries, there are new jobs that it's like, what are these jobs? Right? Like you hear it, but then it's actually like, what do you. Do day-to-day. It seems, as you're saying, it just feels like there's so much work to be done around like further defining these new and emerging roles that you know maybe haven't been around that long, or have experienced really significant shifts in recent years.  Julian Alssid: So it sounds like it's kind of you're seeing different flavors or different accommodations around the country, and the way governors are tackling this and and I'm interested you're one of the things we've seen in the past with with some of the reforms you know, that involve collaboration among education, workforce and economic development actors, is that they kind of come and go with leaders and administrations. So what do you see states doing to kind of bake this work? You talked about some, you know, merging of agencies and that sort of thing. But even on, like, the highest sort of coordination level, like how who's who's leading this work for states. Kerry McKittrick: In part, because, you know, we did see some of the merging of agencies as a key lever that was implemented with new administrations. So it was something that governors could do right away. I think, you know, we did hear in our interviews that different transitions across administrations was difficult, particularly given, you know, usual funding silos. But you know, one thing that I think is interesting, one of the things we drilled down on was the use of Governor's reserve funds. So these are the governor set aside funds under the Workforce, Innovation Opportunity Act, and in some cases, so this, you know, is something from year to year that that could change. You know, states have their plans, but governors ideally have some flexibility and some discretion over where these funds go. In some cases, you know, folks actually said, Oh, well, it's been decided by the administration before us. It's it's hard for us to use this as a priority. In other cases, you know, it was used to backfill administration costs. But what I want to highlight here, which I think is interesting is that there was a case in there are certain cases in which people are using these funds to test ideas that are then that that, once they prove the efficacy, can then be signed into law and funded at the state levels. So I want to, and I think that's a really interesting way of continuing it post, you know, post a certain administration. So an example of this is Washington state. So the governor launched an initiative called economic security for all, which provided, using the governor's reserve funds, which provided wraparound supports and financial assistance for folks just above the WIOA threshold, income threshold. It did that for four years. Studied it found massive wage gains and had huge success. And because of that, the state signed it into law and added state appropriations to fund it. So this was able to kind of continue past the administration, which I think is a really promising use for those funds when they're available. I mean, again, you know, the small funding levels continue to be a challenge, especially for small states, who still have to maintain the data systems right, who still have to administer a lot of these, you know, these practices, but don't have as much funding as a larger state does, just based on the formula.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So building on that, that last comment, certainly, you know this, the small dollars, I guess we would say, is maybe one of the challenges here, but based on on, you know, your research and findings, what do you see as some of the more the other challenges to address that states are addressing or working to address around the effective use of WIOA dollars and other workforce funding dollars as well. Kerry McKittrick: Yeah, I think, you know, lack of good data and information is a real challenge. Folks are, you know, investing in data systems, there's a great you know, data, quality data, workforce quality fund through workforce innovation, and many states are investing in state longitudinal data systems. So there's progress there, but this is still a place where we could use a lot of investment and a lot of improvement. We've done some analysis of state WIOA websites, this was a few years ago, and found that many of them, the most of them, didn't have clear outcomes data on earnings or completion rate or employment after a training program. So not only does this, you know, harm an individual who's trying to use WIOA services to upskill, but it also is makes it difficult for states that are trying to direct resources or allocate resources strategically. So I think we need a lot more investment in data systems so we can understand what works and provide information for, you know, job seekers, so they can make the decisions that are right for them.  Julian Alssid: So Kerry, you know, I know you're you say you're a regular listener, and we do appreciate that. And as you know, one of the questions we like to ask all of our guests is, you know, what are your recommendations for how our audience can become forces in applying? You know, in your case, your research findings to policy and program designs.  Kerry McKittrick: You know, I often say that my worst nightmare is our research sits on a shelf and no one uses it or looks at it. So I appreciate any opportunity to tell people to go to our website and look at our research. But in all seriousness, I think that grounding conversations at the regional level in data and evidence is crucial. You know, I think a lot of conversations that are happening are more anecdotal, like, oh, we know this employer has a shortage, or we're hearing that people may be like this program, or these jobs may be in demand. I would encourage folks to use our research, use some of our data, tools like the Workforce Almanac, which maps out the workforce sector different providers across the country, to actually start these conversations between employers, policy makers and educators at a common place say, okay, you know this is not the the end of the discussion. The data isn't the end of the discussion, but it's the start, and it allows us to, you know, kind of not base our strategies and our practices on assumptions what we might think is happening, but really to look at a common ground of this is what we're actually seeing. So using real time labor market information, you know, these are the job postings that are in demand, or using our research on some of the best practices around college to Job pipeline, to say workforce or work based learning programs have the strongest evidence behind them, let's use that as a starting point to Bridge our partnerships, to realize and to integrate some of the best practices. But again, these are regional conversations. This is very place based work, right? And so, you know, hopefully these are tools, but we don't think these are, you know, necessarily the answers. There's a lot more work to do, a lot more research questions out there that we need to answer, but hopefully it's a good start in the right direction.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, absolutely. I think that that is such a key piece of this work, right? It's like, what, how can we draw from best practices and, like, common processes that seem to work really well, and then at what point do you say, okay, but what's happening locally, regionally, and what does that mean for, like, what we actually do on the ground right? And it's, I feel like it's a really, it's a complicated balancing act of trying to learn from what's working well in different areas, but then also saying, Well, what's, what's unique to this region and where are what, what strengths should we leverage, right or build upon? It feels like it's, I don't know if you were finding that in your research at all. But I feel like that's just like, just living in this work. I feel like that's one thing that's always like, top of mind for us. It's like, how can you, like, you know, take what's best, a best practice, but also really apply it in a localized way that makes sense for wherever you're working? Kerry McKittrick: Absolutely. You know, we've done some research on community colleges, as I mentioned at the beginning, and their role in their ecosystems, and we specifically looked in one project on how they were using data, real time, labor market data, to drive some of their their programs. And we found that while that was a great tool and it was a great starting point, it actually didn't provide all the answers. And so having conversation, validating and supplementing that data with conversations with employers was just as crucial. And so I absolutely think you're right there. You know differences a job that may be in demand in one area is not in another area, right? It's so regionally specific, a challenge of out migration in one area may not be the same in another right different industries require different types of services. So that's where we've tried to kind of pull out some of these shining examples and some of the best practices. Hopefully in our research we, you know, we hope institutions or states can look at it and say, oh, there's an example that maybe applies to my my situation or my context, and that I can, you know, use I can see a small state, you know, a state like Wyoming is not going to have the same sort of workforce context as California or New York, but perhaps they can look to another State and say, I can learn from that one. And so there's a lot of that that we try to do too. I think the quantitative data is great, but the qualitative data is equally important. And looking at the case studies and really what works for different contexts is crucial. Julian Alssid: Well. And Kerry, you know, you said it a couple. Level of times. I think the the notion of the data as a starting point for discussion is so key. And even then looking at other examples around the country, and, you know, it's all kind of this iterative process that goes straight back to the dual customer approach. And you just kind of have to keep, you know, testing and test the test, test the numbers, test the hypotheses, iterate, you know, etc, and then the economies keep changing, and demographics keep shifting. So it's, it really is this kind of ongoing, you know, living, breathing, kind of organism, this workforce system. Kerry McKittrick: Absolutely, I think, and the labor market changes faster often than the system does, which is certainly a challenge, particularly, I think, for education systems, for trainers, keeping up the labor market is a challenge, particularly today, with all of these kind of technological advancements. And generative AI is changing things faster than you know, I think we would expect, and there's just a lot of unknowns out there, and so being responsive, continuing those relationships in a meaningful way, think is crucial. Sometimes it's easy to say, oh, develop a partnership. Well, what does that look like? What does that mean? Right? Like, what, what is a good kind of communication and cadence? So I think that's where learning from other examples is, is especially crucial. Julian Alssid: Absolutely so. So Kerry, as we, as we wind down our discussion, how can learners learn more and to continue to follow your work, Kerry McKittrick: We have a newsletter. Please sign up for our newsletter on our website. I promise we won't inundate you every week. Um, we send it out when we have new releases, and follow us on LinkedIn. We, we try to, you know, blast out a lot of our research and other research that we may not be doing, but that we may see folks from other centers, you know, finding the latest data on generative AI the other day, we, we posted research for several researchers, but including one of our faculty directors, actually, Rafaella Sadun, on the use of Generative AI as a team member. So in addition to our own reports, we have all sorts of, you know, in our our own ecosystem, all sorts of things we're trying to highlight, and then we also highlight events. So we'll have different webinar series where we'll bring in folks and talk about our latest research or some of their work. And you know, again, we try to bring in folks from across the ecosystem, so from employers to researchers to educators and policy makers. So I encourage everyone to stay up to date, because we are busy. It certainly sounds that way based on today's conversation, and we will definitely continue to follow your work and really appreciate you joining us for this conversation today. Kerry: Thanks for having me. It was fun.  Julian Alssid: Thanks, Kerry.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please Subscribe, Like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Dana Stephenson and Dave Savory, co-founders of Riipen, discuss their journey creating a platform that connects students with project-based experiential learning opportunities. The conversation explores how work-integrated learning can bridge the gap between education and employment through flexible experiences that complement traditional internship models and help students gain valuable experience and transition more successfully into the workforce. Stephenson and Savory share insights on the evolution of experiential learning from limited co-op programs to a more accessible continuum of opportunities that help overcome barriers for both students and employers. The discussion also examines emerging trends, including the growth of dedicated experiential learning roles at institutions and development of regional learning ecosystems.  Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  Julian Alssid: Kaitlin, it feels like every day we're hearing more about the challenges facing new college graduates entering the workforce.  Kaitlin LeMoine: It's true. Julian, some hiring managers say recent grads are unprepared for the world of work, and employers are increasingly seeking candidates with work experience, even for entry level positions. It's a pretty tough landscape to navigate out there Julian Alssid: Yeah, and that's where work based learning becomes so critical. More and more jobs require experience so so we have to build experiential learning into learners academic programs, but developing effective experiential learning programs at scale can be incredibly challenging for both employers and educators  Kaitlin LeMoine: Which is why we're so excited to have Dana Stephenson and Dave Savory of Riipen with us today. Ripen is tackling this issue head on by providing a work integrated learning platform and ecosystem.  Julian Alssid: Dana is Riipen's, Co founder and CEO, and he launched Riipen with a vision to end underemployment by ensuring every learner can access authentic, project based experiential learning opportunities. And Dave is Riipens, co founder and VP of experiential learning, with over 15 years of experience and entrepreneurship and business development. He brings us to this important work.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Dana and Dave, welcome to Work Forces. We're looking forward to learning more about how Riipen is, making work based learning accessible at scale.  Dana Stephenson: Thanks, Kaitlin, thanks, Julian, great to be here. So as we dive in today, can you please tell us more about your respective backgrounds and your current roles at Riipen, and from there, we'd love to hear more about the problems that you're looking to address through Riipen.  Dave Savory: Sure. Yeah, thanks great to be here. Thanks for having us on. My name is Dave Savory. I'm one of the co founders of Riipen, and lead our experiential learning team. Really, in my day to day role, I focus on working really deeply with partners across a pretty diverse range of industries, in higher ed workforce, intermediary groups, government as well as funding partners. So really thinking through and excited to invest in really new models that can remove barriers and create more access to experiential learning programs, and so excited to share a little bit of that work today.  Dana Stephenson: Yeah, Dana Stevenson, Co founder and CEO of Riipen. We're building the world's fastest growing and largest work-based learning marketplace, connecting to students to companies through short term skills specific projects where students get experienced professional connections and find the jobs they love and employers gain fresh insights from the next generation of leaders and decision-makers and build and diversify their talent pipeline for upcoming roles in their in their organization. And we were an incredibly mission driven company. And I think, you know, the mission for us is really all about entering under employment globally. It's an exciting story of sort of where that came actually. The story really, really kicks off where Dave and I met back in business school, back in back to 2012.  Dave Savory: Yeah, we actually, well, we actually met in 2010 very serendipitously. We were in an orientation of our business school program at University of Victoria, we randomly sat next to each other and and instantly had a lot of mutual kind of values and alignments. And the following year, we actually had a course together where a faculty member came in and kind of ripped up the Harvard Business Review case and and brought in a CEO of a local mid sized company in the Victoria area, and basically said, hey, everyone this, instead of doing a case of a textbook, everyone's going to break up into groups and we're going to do a real project for credit on this company's kind of strategic crossroads that they were, that they were at, and Dana and I were in the same group, and we had quite a bit of work experience before entering our undergrad experience, and we just thought this was amazing in terms of, like, how to better engage with the learning and really apply the learning. And we had the CEO came in with a few team members. They presented their organization. We had a few kind of check in meetings with them throughout the semester, and at the end of the semester, the team came back, and they kind of did a Shark Tank kind of experience for every group, presenting their recommendations. And we just came out of that experience with just like so much more enthusiasm around like, Hey, why can't more of our experience, our courses that we're doing, who all that all have relevant kind of real world applied projects that are built into them. Why can't most of why can't more of them be with real employers that are going to help us build our network, develop our skills, grow our portfolio and our resume of experience, and that was really kind of our light bulb moment for why we started to go down the path of building record. Julian Alssid: Yeah, that's so cool. So Dana, how has the experiential learning landscape evolved since you started? Dana Stephenson: Right? A ton. Dave's, you know, the story we just described takes us back to 2010, 2012 we were part of the University of Victoria. So Riipens, a Canadian company born out of the University of Victoria as a student project for students. But one of the main reasons why we focused on on this project-based experience model is that in Canada, maybe people audience may or may not know. But in Canada, Northeastern, the co op model that Northeastern and Drexel and universities in Cincinnati and the US are so well known for it among others. In Canada, Co Op is huge. Almost every student, every institution offers a Co Op program, highly sought after, really well funded, really one of the most amazing experiences that we've had. So when, when we first got into this space in Canada, experiential learning, work, integrated learning, was really all about the co op model, but in the programs that we're offering Co Op, by no surprise, just like we're seeing in the US right now, I think Northeastern is now harder to get into than Dartmouth, given some of the stats that we're seeing, unsurprisingly, in Canada, the programs that we're offering Co Op were highly sought after getting a lot a lot of a lot of enrollment. The challenge is, at the time 2 million students across Canada, only about 200,000 students were getting access to a co op, so a huge supply and demand problem. And we started thinking to ourselves that there's got to be really a better way. There's got to be a more flexible approach to help reach students earlier on and throughout their education pathway. Dave mentioned we had a lot of experience when we got into this, when we were early on going through our education pathway. So we had no problem getting our Co Op, but we were shocked to find out how many students were in their their third year and had no work experience. So I think where we see things evolve is that traditionally, when people think about work based learning in the higher ed context. They've been thinking about the more traditional Co Op model. They've been thinking about the more traditional internship model. But the evolution is now what we're really excited about is that more folks are really starting to see this on a full continuum. Learners have all faced different barriers. They might be in different geographic locations. They might have other jobs that might have to hold on, hold on to to help pay for their higher education degree or program, they might have loved ones that are taken care of, a whole bunch of different barriers. And so the beauty of having an entire continuum is you can meet the students where they are. We can have a whole bunch of different types of approaches, going from lower intensity, shorter duration opportunities that can fit within a course or fit in a co-curricular setting, all the way up to higher intensity, longer duration experiences like a full blown internship, Co Op or apprenticeship and everything in between. And that's part of the, probably one of the most exciting evolutions that we've been seeing over the last little bit.  Dave Savory: Yeah, and I just add to that, it's been interesting to kind of see just the evolution and the nature of how a lot of these experiences, like when we first started, a lot of the experiences that we were supporting, of course, we're an online platform, but a lot of the the educators and the employers that we are working with were doing in person kind of collaborations. And then obviously, as the as the pandemic happened, there was a massive push to remote and virtual collaborations between employers and students, which obviously has amazing benefits in terms of breaking down barriers for learners who are not in parts of the country that have access to a lot of employment or industry opportunities. And now we're kind of seeing a bit of a push back towards some sort of hybrid model where we're very focused on, how do we how do we take the best from the remote kind of virtual model, but then how do we actually layer in kind of a local or regional ecosystem element to it, so that learners are actually getting experiences with organizations that are relevantly close to them. And so we're seeing a really nice, just kind of trend of how some of these regional and and statewide ecosystems are starting to blossom.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So you've presented kind of all the it sounds like there's a full suite and range of offerings that you try to provide to both, I would imagine, kind of, it's kind of a three sided marketplace, right? So, I guess for employers, institutions and learners, you're looking to provide kind of a range of opportunities, work based, learning opportunities, or positions or projects. How do you go about doing that? Like, can we get a little bit into the nuts and bolts of like, of, you know, we're thinking about thesecurrent trends. How is your How are you building your company in response to those trends?  Dana Stephenson: I will say one point of clarification. So we do offer a whole suite, but we're very vertically deep on the project based experience. And what's excited with the project based experience is that it can be 10 hours long completed over two weeks. It can be individual or group, or it can be 250 hours long can be completed over two semesters and everything in between. And that's really what gives it the flexibility, and really ensures that you can have these high quality experiences where students are focused on developing skills rather than some of the experiences that you do sometimes see out there. We all know that some internships are better than others, and you can really ensure that you're focusing on career relevant skills as part of that project and solving a real business challenge in your community or around the world. So we don't do traditional internships. We don't do traditional Co Op programs, just to be clear on that. But what's really exciting is most of our partners, actually, the vast majority of our partners, realize that the fastest way left in a world of really challenging supply and demand in the internship and Co Op space. One of the fastest ways to grow your internship and Co Op supply is to actually do more project based experiences that attracts more employers. They engage as a stepping stone. They convert those into Co Op and internship employers. And of course, it prepares your students to go land those so we're extremely complimentary, but we are very much focused on the on the project based. So how do we do that? We've got an entire you name it. We really are a marketplace on one side of the marketplace. We attract employers. We work with our partners to help them activate their networks of alumni, activate their networks of even Co Op and internship employers who want to, who want a wider variety and wider spectrum of things that they can do to engage students. We have our own channel partners with business associations and chambers and all sorts of organizations where we have a one to many approach to reach employers. And then, of course, we do our own outreach. We provide a platform that just makes it really easy for companies to come on and start to input all their ideas, all their challenges, all the goals that they're trying to achieve. And it starts to pump out a whole bunch of different project ideas that they can put into our ecosystem and make those available to our academic institutions. So typically, we've got anywhere from 3000 to 5000 live projects in the marketplace waiting to be matched to an educator to provide to their students at any given time. We completely oversubscribed that side. So we've actually flipped the supply and demand challenge, and the employers are now, rather than students competing for jobs in this marketplace, companies compete to work with students. The other side of it is we have our partner institutions, and they come on and it's really all the whole system here is very educator driven, so the educators get to be learned very early on. That if we can put the educators in the driver's seat and allow them to create the experience that aligns with their learning objectives, and then we can use the platform to help them communicate in that experience in a way that helps the employers and the educators be speaking the same language. Then we can make these really meaningful matches and get these projects that align with the business and talent needs but also align with the learning sections of the program embedded directly to the curriculum. So we that's sort of like half the battle right there. We just really build this marketplace offer the opportunities for these to connect at the right project, the right educator for the right students at the right time. And that helps with you know, the larger we grow, the more we scale up, the easier that becomes, the more valuable that becomes for everyone who's participating in our in our in our network. And then we have a whole suite of tools. So once you actually launch these project based experiences. We've learned from our partners that, how do I manage my students? How do I help make sure that my students are communicating well to the employers, having meaningful conversations? How do I track them through? How do I survey them before, during and after? How do I create opportunities for reflection on the skills that they're developing as part of these projects? All of that is built into the platform so that our partners can manage it. They can track it, they can measure it, and they can really see how much these interventions, these project based experiences, are improving students, retention, students, improving students, student success, student completion rates, and, of course, ultimately, student employment outcomes.  Dave Savory: Just build on that by really focusing on the project based model, we're really tapping into a pool of employers, primarily small and medium sized employers that aren't traditionally engaging in more formal kind of apprenticeships or internship or Co Op model, because they are a big lift and they're quite resource intensive for smaller organizations to to really support well. And so by working with employers who are kind of thinking through more, smaller, flexible, project based experiences, we're able to to engage an audience that isn't participating in some of those traditional models. And that's really helped us to grow that side of the ecosystem very well. Julian Alssid: It's quite an undertaking. I mean, it sounds like there's a lot of moving parts. And I'm interested to hear a little bit about I'm interested to hear more about how you actually build this. Dave, is this like, Do you have a team of folks who are developing these projects? How do you, you know, what's the level of involvement on the part of the employers and the other partners? And then I really want to hear about challenges. What keeps you guys up at night?  Dave Savory: Well, I mean, we do have a great team on both sides of the ecosystem, supporting educators and our academic partners, as well as our foyer partners. And on the employer side, we're really focusing on, we almost recruit and engage employers in a just in time, way based on kind of the needs and demands that we're seeing from our educators and our academic partners. We and we've learned over time that when they actually see a tangible opportunity at a institution that they recognize and it's a call to action of a real program that's accepting applications that helps small, medium sized businesses, any any business really be like, yes, I want to do that. Or maybe that's not a good fit, but I want to post my project into the ecosystem. And so the way matchmaking happens is it goes both ways, so employers are able to apply to an educators program, and vice versa. A lot of great a lot of our educators are actually really good at going into the employer side of the ecosystem, searching for projects that are aligned with their courses, and actually reaching out and being proactive to employers. And so we see success kind of both ways. We've also really been investing and leveraging AI in the Riipen system to just remove friction points for just saving time and helping employers, obviously, creating content and thinking of project ideas is, is it can be a challenge. How do I write a project that's a really good fit for for an educator, that would be a good project for their class? And we've always had really great templates built out, but really, in the last year and a half, two years, we've built into the platform the ability for employers to go in and just type out ideas that they're interested in doing and use our project AI tools to create a project scope that's really well defined and is designed in a way that can be embedded into into a course. And then we have kind of a an assessment of when they're looking to apply to courses, if their project is a good fit, green, yellow or red, and if it's if it's a great fit, that really increases the match rates, but it also helps employers think through, okay, well, what do I need to do to add into this project, or change the project scope to make sure it is aligned with what an educator, what an academic partner, is looking for? One of the one of the major challenges that we see has have always seen, is that there's no shortage from our academic partners and educators who want to deliver this kind of high quality, high impact experience to their to their to their learners.  Dana Stephenson: The biggest challenge that I think we've been dealing with really, from from from day one has always been I'd love to offer this for this my students. I see how this is happening out there, and other faculty members are doing this, but where am I going to find the time? Where am I going to find the connections? And how am I going to manage this? So technology can play a huge role in that we've we can help bring the connections. We can help remove friction as Dave, as Dave described. We can, we can, we can offer enormous amount of features to help with the management, but ultimately, that's only one part of the equation. One of the most exciting trends that I think we're seeing right now in this in this space, is the the fastest growing job title that we've seen out there is experiential learning coordinator or manager or director or work based learning manager or director or work integrated learning manager or director or coordinator. And some of these teams are actually growing quite big, and they really kind of bridge the gap between the academic world and the career services world. And these are the teams that we're often working very closely with. So often we'll work directly with faculty members, but as an institution, starts to really see the opportunity to scale this and go from five to 50 to 100 different courses at their institution and 1000s of different students getting these experiences on a semesterly basis. And there's there's this opportunity to build out a team like this that we can really work very closely with to run these programs on behalf of faculty members, and then there's a whole new cohort of faculty members who wouldn't have otherwise participated, who are now willing to participate, because there's someone on campus who's a staff member who really understands their institution, understands the strategic goals, understands what you know, is trying to standardize how things are measured, has a tool like Riipen that can say, hey, look, you focus on teaching and learning, and you focus on supporting the students. We're going to focus on managing the employers and managing the students through this project. And we'll all work on this together. And that way, really, you know, within an ecosystem, within an academic institutions, ecosystem really becomes this, this, this partnership between the experiential learning coordination coordinator, the faculty member, and Riipen, setting up the best possible experience the students and employers together. Dave Savory: Yeah, and just to together. Yeah, and just to kind of build on the from a challenges perspective, I know from a regional kind of ecosystem perspective, I mean, one of the main challenges is just breaking down silos across a lot of different stakeholders who are doing really great work and all have the right intentions, Across workforce, higher ed, government, policy, chambers of commerce, like, how do we actually, they're all doing pockets of this work really well, but how do we actually kind of break down some of those silos and bring bring these folks to the table under a more unified approach, to really drive the outcomes that they're looking for, their for their different stakeholders that they're serving.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So one thing that strikes me is this balance of what sounds like a really hands on and like customized approach, in many ways, with some amount of standardization as well, like around you know, I would imagine, in order to ensure like quality of the types of project proposals that are coming in on the employer side, and then what the learn, the quality of the learner experience that you know that occurs as a result of the connection between the instructor and the employer. So I'm just curious, how do you, how do you balance that customization, standardization, tension or and do you see it as a tension?  Dana Stephenson: I guess we've taken a hybrid approach. When we actually first launched Riipen, it was all standardized. You know, when our partners, our academic institutions, came on board, they launched experiences. They launched it the Riipen way. When our employers came on they launched it the rRipen way. Everyone was joining Riipen and getting matched, made on Riipen. They ran it the right, really, really the Riipen way, and that was super successful at reaching scale, as we mentioned, standardization really helped with removing friction reaching scale, which really helped us solve the chicken and egg challenge and the cold start problem that a lot of schools have when they want to get an ecosystem off the ground. But then it became very clear that every institution that we work with is very unique. The students that they serve are unique. The employers that they engage with and serve, and you know, the challenges they want, they want to support in the community, are unique. So they're sort of becoming a whole wide variety of different ways that our partner institutions wanted to run these programs, what they wanted to measure, what was important to them, how, you know how to set up these programs, both from a curricular or co curricular way. And so what we essentially ended up launching is this hybrid model where each academic institution that we work with can launch their own private, branded portal that is completely configurable. Can they can set it up the way they want to set up. They can set up the nomenclature. They can set up how they want to what skills they skills they want to measure and track, you know, how they want to survey their students. They're reporting everything. And they can bring in their own employers, and their own employers really live within that ecosystem. So they're constantly building up their own vibrant ecosystem. But what we also heard of our institutions is they did not want to lose access to the marketplace, because that was incredibly valuable. So the hybrid world really came from us being able to still have the more standardized, open marketplace where all of our partners live. And so any employers who come from our network, when we're bringing them in, they're coming into the standardized marketplace where they can launch their projects super quickly. They can get them off the ground. They can really build the scale of the opportunities available. That's how we can make these project based experiences abundant, and really sort of flip the supply and demand challenge. But each of our institutions now can launch their own custom configured portal the way that they want to run it, and then we seed that ecosystem. We're able to seed that ecosystem. So, you know, another challenge before we did this was, you know, helping schools start their own ecosystem was really challenging. They all face their own chicken and egg. They all face their own cold start problem. But then with the with this ability to have the hybrid, we could seed that ecosystem with more than enough employers get it off the ground, and then once it gets off the ground, you'll start to quickly see that many of our partners, they'll flip from 80% of the employers coming from our ecosystem and 20% from their own networks to the complete opposite. 80% are these employers who are from their own local community, using our tools, coming back year over year over year, and they're less reliant on our open marketplace, but they still always have that so they want to launch a new program in a new area that they haven't done yet. Don't worry, we can help you get that started as well.  Dave Savory: Yeah, and on, on your the point of your question about like, support of the learners and the employers once they're actually in an experience, we've had over 275,000 students now in the US and Canada go through and complete a work based learning project and and we've learned a lot in terms of, no matter who's running the experience, what are the key things that need to happen in order to set the experience up properly, in order to source the right employers, in order to set the right expectations, in order to support learners, connecting to those employers, and making sure that the little things are happening in terms of signing NDAs, having kickoff meetings, having those those milestone check ins, getting the right information from the employers and actually utilizing and maximizing kind of the opportunity right through providing feedback and reflection and helping learners build a portfolio that can help them articulate that experience and the skills that they learned. And so those things need to happen, regardless of who does it. And so we've kind of taken a philosophy and approach over over time, we've actually built out a specialized team at Riipen that is is focused on being in the weeds, kind of support experts in managing these experiences on behalf of some of our academic partners. And or we're working with schools that have that function built up already, and they've been investing in that experiential learning management element. And or working with faculty who have been doing this for years, and they have a really well defined system. And so before we kind of launch any partnership, we really want to make sure that everyone understands kind of all those key things that need to happen to make sure that we're going to be driving the outcomes that everyone's looking for.  Julian Alssid: Well, you've sort of, you've sort of gone there., Dave. The next question, the one that we like to ask all our guests is, how can our audience become forces in, you know, authentically integrating work based learning experiences into educational offerings, from from short term programming to long term degrees, and whether it's folks who are already involved in those efforts or who want to become involved, you know, what are the first steps.  Dave Savory: I would recommend, if you're not ready to kind of launch a wide scale kind of program, don't be afraid to just get started, even if it's a small implementation. Don't let perfection kind of be get in the way of progress. I think that's the term. But often, with a lot of programs that we talk to their forming committees, and they're doing research, and they're figuring out how to do this and what that impact is going to be, and how to budget and resource and those things all need to happen, of course, but that shouldn't be in lieu of getting started. There's cohorts of students going through their programs every every semester that that that's happening, and they're missing out. And so I guess the message there would be, don't be afraid to get started, even if it's in a small, kind of controlled area that can then inform how you're going to invest in this work. Further.  Dana Stephenson: The thing I'll add to this is really adopting a yes and mindset, or a both and mindset. I think one of the things that a lot of higher education institutions often will get tripped up on is, you know, should we be doing internships, or should we be doing project based learning, or should we be doing simulated experiences, or should we be doing, you know, authentic, real, live engagement projects with real employers. And, you know, going back to the whole continuing continuum conversation right from the beginning, we're big believers that it's like, yeah, it's a both and and it really shouldn't be a debate between one or the other. It really should be. Let's try and invest in all of these types of experiences. Meet the students where they are, have them scaffold them throughout their entire education pathway, so that when they get to the more intensive experiences, they're really set up for success or when they're ready to enter into the workforce. They have more than enough experience. They've been through the challenges they've experienced a whole wide variety. Have a lot of career, career clarity and exposure to industry, and they're the best set up to land meaningful employment post graduation.  Dave Savory: And don't forget to engage the small and medium sized businesses a lot of our institutions, which is great, but a lot of them tend to go after the large kind of Fortune 500 type logos and employers, which we should obviously do. But there's a wealth of opportunities and possibilities with with organizations that are in your regions, in your backyard, that might not have that large employer brand presence, but they can provide really amazing opportunities for your partners,  Julian Alssid: Which is where the vast majority of people work, in smaller companies.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today. It is really that you're the growth that Riipen has experienced is remarkable, that your the reach is really noteworthy, and we appreciate being able to dive more deeply with you all today about you know some of the ins and outs of how you how you've made this happen. As we close out our conversation today, how can our listeners learn more about Riipen and continue to follow your work? Dana Stephenson: Riipen.com is the first place that you can come explore. We actually have an open marketplace. You can explore live engagements of app. What are employers posting onto the platform? What are our experiences that post secondary institutions are posting onto the platform? What kind of workforce programs are being developed and launched on the platform? We've got a whole spotlight area and wall of love where you can hear from our partners and their experiences with this. We also have an annual impact report, and so we encourage everyone to come and sign up. We did our first inaugural annual impact report last year. You can check that out. We will be releasing our new one in the in the coming months. So there's a sign up for our newsletter and our annual impact report to stay engaged. Dave Savory: And we also attend a lot of conferences, so I really appreciate you having us both on today.  Julian Alssid: Appreciate you being here.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you both.  Dana Stephenson: Thank you so much. Really appreciate it.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to workforces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell, you can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Matt Sigelman, President of the Burning Glass Institute, discusses the crucial role of real-time labor market data in guiding workforce development and helping stakeholders navigate the evolving skills landscape. Sigelman highlights the rapid evolution of skills, noting the decreasing 'half-life' of skills and the growing importance of lifelong learning. The episode explores how workforce systems can adapt to these changes, including the need for better training infrastructure and a focus on career progression. Sigelman also examines the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on the future of work and the importance of complementing AI with human skills to ensure a more equitable and prosperous future. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  So Julian, for years, we've been helping clients navigate the messy intersection of work and learning, and using and interpreting labor market data has been essential to help inform and guide the direction and decision making of various stakeholders, ranging from business and industry to higher ed and training providers.  Julian Alssid: It's true Kaitlin, but early on, data tools were limited government data lags, which made it hard to keep up with pace of change, and the tools available were also challenging to use or interpret, which which made it difficult to adopt the use of this data across whole teams and organizations. Often, data analysis was housed under, you know, one person, or in a small analytics shop, which further like limited ongoing use by the individuals charged with educating and training and hiring. And to compound this all further, students and workers were even further removed from labor market data and related trends. Kaitlin LeMoine: And that's why the work of our guest today is so critical. Matt Sigelman, president of the Burning Glass Institute, has dedicated his career to unlocking new avenues for mobility, opportunity and equity through skills. He and his team created the field of real time labor market data, a breakthrough innovation which has transformed how we understand and navigate the world of work.  Julian Alssid: Matt's work has cracked the code of an increasingly dynamic labor market tracking demand for 10s of 1000s of skills across 30 countries before before launching the Burning Glass Institute, he was CEO and then Chairman of Lightcast for over 20 years, and worked at McKinsey & Company and Capital One. Matt also currently serves as a senior advisor at the Harvard Project on the workforce, and is founder of the elementary school mainline classical Academy. Is it? He writes widely on the job market, and it's consulted frequently by public officials and the global media.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Matt, welcome to Work Forces. We're so excited to have you with us today.  Matt Sigelman: It's great to be together. Thanks so much for having me.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. Well, so as we jump into the conversation today, can you please tell us a bit about your background and your current role at the Burning Glass Institute.  Matt Sigelman: As you pointed out, I spent 20 years before starting the Burning Glass Institute, building what's now come to be called Lightcast. What a lot of people don't realize is that, like cast started not as a data company, but as a job matching company. We built a engine for first being able to read people's resumes, and then to be able to what they call resume parsing, and then to be able to match them to jobs. And it was a successful little business and we wound up doing a lot of work in state and local workforce systems, providing them the the matching engines that were used to be able to support clients and connecting them with work. And this was around kind of the start of the Great Recession, when suddenly a lot of workforce agencies found themselves inundated with people, many of whom weren't traditional kinds of workforce system customers. People who are professionals or from a wide array of occupations and, you know, we had this great engine and, and what we realized, though, is that it could only work well if it could connect people with jobs. There had to be jobs for them to be capable, to be connected to and what, of course, your listeners who work in workforce systems know is that employers haven't always been so forthcoming in connecting and putting their jobs in front of workforce systems. And so what we essentially had was this Ferrari engine flight plucked down inside of a Yugo. Right, you know, it searched across the 100 jobs that happened to be listed on, on what effectively was an online bulletin board in, you know, in a workforce center. And so what occurred to us is that we were solving the wrong problem. We were solving a one on one matching problem. That is to say, how do I match Matt with a specific job? But so much of the problem that we have in workforce development, economic development, in policy, but also in the world, of education and employers? Well, is a planning problem. It's not a one on one matching. It's a problem. It's it's a how do it's a it's a population genetics problem, right? Like, how do you connect this group of people with these kinds of jobs? Because that's when you can start to plan. And so we started scratching our heads and said, Why is that not happening? And what we realized is the same reason why our matching engine was constrained. The fact that there weren't a lot of jobs in one place was the same reason that a lot of that planning wasn't happening. And so we said, Well, gee, this is this is strange right now. Pretty much most job postings. And I think this was largely true, then it's certainly a lot more true  17 years later today, that pretty much most job postings across whether you're talking about very entry level jobs, whether you're talking about highly skilled professional jobs, are posted online. And so instead of having to rely on employers to come to you, you could actually go and just scrape their jobs. And so we we built a whole system of spiders to crawl the web and bring back what ultimately became millions of job postings every day. But our ambition, again, was, was not so much to create a bigger database for a matching service. Our ambition really quickly became to be able to say, what do those jobs say? How can they help us plan more effectively, so that we're not leaving people, leaving training, leaving policy at the mercy of the spot market, where it's like, okay, what jobs happen to be available today? But instead to be able to think ahead and say, Hey, what's the training that we're gonna need to be what are the programs that we're gonna need to invest in? So, what we did is we started to develop all these coding engines to be able to make sense and interpret, make sense of and interpret all the jobs that we're bringing back. And that was sort of the birth of what people have come to refer to as the real time labor market industry. And it's, it's evolved greatly since then, and I'm proud of the work that Lightcast and others are doing, to continue to advance those data. I left that three years ago, and I left it because as powerful as the data are, I came to realize that a lot of what's missing is the ability, is, the trend is, is the translation and transformation layers? How do we use these data to affect fundamental transformations? And a lot of that really isn't necessarily about the data themselves. It's not about software, but it's about working together with stakeholders in the field and solving things very experimentally, because a lot of these big problems, the big, thorny problems that we're all trying to solve, well, inherently, they haven't been solved yet. So the Institute is a fully independent nonprofit data laboratory to advance research and practice at the intersection of the of the future of work and the future of learning, where our goal is to undertake the kinds of experiments that advance economic mobility, that build community prosperity and that ensure that we're, we're seeing better outcomes for workers and learners.  Julian Alssid: It's great Matt to hear you tell the story, and you know kind of I've, I've known you and really followed you through this, most all of this process, and I'm glad that you're now at the intersection of work and learning and trying to help solve these, these thorny problems. What? What are some of the trends that you're seeing now? And you know, at that intersection and in particular areas of research that you're really excited about and are kind of looking to further unpack.  Matt Sigelman: So when I think about the intersection of work and learning, what's shaping the imperative there and shaping the greatest sets of transformations is the level of dynamism and skills. We're used to thinking about a labor market that's denominated by jobs and a lot of the prognostication that we see is about jobs going away, new jobs being born. What we see instead is that the greatest changes are happening at the layer of skills. What are the skills that it takes to land a job? What are the skills that get accrued within a job, and what's the dynamism that's reshaping those skills that's really important, because the skills affect not only what it takes to get a job, but they affect how you get your next job. You think about a job transition, you're essentially taking the skills that you just learned, and you're moving from job to job. And what we're seeing is a tremendous rate of skill change. People often talk about a half life of skills. Listeners won't be surprised to hear that that half life is quickening and quickening. Well, quickly, we did some work a few years ago with our colleagues at BCG, where we found that the average job has seen 37% of its skills replaced in just the prior five years, and that was before generative AI. So here's the thing about it, though, when we think about that pace of skill change, we really sort of assume it's about technology change, and there's certainly no small amount of that, but the greater set of changes are actually about skills blending from across domains. Think about a field like marketing. You know, we all know people in marketing, they tend to be very nice people because they went into marketing because they know how to talk to people well. So you have right brain people, and all of a sudden marketing is becoming a data driven sport. So you have right brain people who need to be able to use left brain skills, not hard to find marketing people, but try finding a marketing person with SQL skills, and the job becomes much harder to fill. It comes, you know, starts to command big salary premiums. So we're seeing that kind of phenomenon around the market. Here's why I talk about that as as the key imperative shaping the intersection of work and learning, because what it says is that a educational model of once and done learning. You go to high school, maybe you go to college, and then you sort of never look back and go a step into your career. A model like that that was already challenged is increasingly broken or perhaps risible at minimum. I think you could say it's inadequate. Maybe that was a more polite way of saying it so. What it says is that there's 165 million US workers in the workforce, and the vast majority of them are in a position where they need to be able to acquire new skills, and they need to be able to acquire new skills on the fly. And we need an infrastructure for that. The logical infrastructure that we have things like our workforce system is tremendously under invested. Think about the scope of Workforce Investment monies that actually get allocated towards skill training, talking about a few 100 million dollars out of a couple billion of total WIOA funds a year. You think about our community colleges, which are slightly better funded, but the vast majority of, or at least significant majority of community college enrollments right now are into we're called degree transfer programs and not to workforce training. And so we really are leaving people to navigate their transitions without much guidance and without the resources to acquire the learning that enables them to move up, that gives them a greater chance of making sure that each of those transition is an opportunity for greater economic mobility. The average US worker right now will see 12 career transitions over the course of her career, and each of those transitions is an opportunity to either move up or to stay put or perhaps even fall back. And right now, we are not helping people systematically to discover what are the skills that will help them move up? What are the skills that are in demand that will allow them to command a premium? What are the skills that will prepare them for the future? And even if we help them discover those skills, we don't provide them with an infrastructure to acquire them. So you know that says to me that there's a whole big space around around lifelong learning. It has implications for higher ed, because right now, higher ed has largely surrendered that space to online players, and I think there's a big opportunity for colleges and universities in a time that they're seeing enrollments thin. It also has implications for how we think about non degree credentials and what it takes to make them successful.  Kaitlin LeMoine: I think that what you've said about kind of this moment of both the reality that the skills are changing very, very quickly, right? And what's needed as far as the half life of, kind of like, what's most up to date, as far as job relevant skills is shifting more and more quickly, kind of at the same moment as perhaps we're all needing to rethink, what does it look like to keep up to speed. I guess I'm wondering, like, who's whose job is this to figure this out, right? Because it feels like it's both on the it's, it maybe lives with the individual. It might live with employers. It certainly could live with higher ed and training institutions, but only if learners are going to them. So kind of, how do we think about, you know, how we all work to solve this challenge? It's a really, really big one that you're raising here.  Matt Sigelman: So I'm so glad you raised this, this question. There's right now no shortage of dysfunction in the market. For the most part, what we have is a system in which the responsibility for navigation rests with individuals themselves, with individual workers and learners. And that's a problem because individual workers lack information, they lack counseling, and they lack liquidity, both financial liquidity and time liquidity. They lack the financial liquidity to be able to invest in training and the time liquidity to be able to have the time to do it when... Kaitlin LeMoine: Or even be aware that they need to do it right. Matt Sigelman: Exactly. And so if you sort of think about where there would be logic in this. There'd be a lot of logic in employers investing. There'd be a lot of logic in the public investing in this. But both are encumbered right now by issues of cost, time and risk. We've got employers who, whether logically or not, wind up getting obsessed with what economists call free rider problems, right? You know, I've got a workforce that's likely to turn over very quickly, and it's true that, you know, in a lot of roles, retention is historically low and and so you know, why should I, as an employer, invest in training somebody who's likely to be leaving now, there's, there's all sorts of good logic for why they should, but, but regardless, you can understand the perception of how it's hard to for an employer to get a return on investment when the time duration of their return is is likely to be so low. But it doesn't change the fact that employers, the ones who are in the best position to signal to their employer, to their employees, right? You know, you would want an employer to say, Hey, Matt, I'm struggling to fill these jobs up here, and I think you could fill them, I want to pay you more. Here's the learning that I want you to take on. Here's the training I'm going to invest in you to get. The public has significant stake in this as well as we think about, you know, kind of our modern Sputnik moments in our global contest for economic competitiveness, as we we try to navigate an increasingly fraught geopolitical environment, the ability to be able to have a highly skilled workforce working in the kind of sectors that we think are going to be most important means that we need to have the opportunities to invest. But here too, I think, you know, we're, we're struggling with issues of, of cost on the one side, of planning on the other, which is, which is a time question, how do we predict where those changes can be and what the sequence of those changes going to be? And so, as a result, what we have, and by the way, educators, likewise, are either asleep at the switch in the sense that they're not offering the kinds of programs that are oriented towards selling degrees. And they are also where they are trying to promote things. Are trying to promote their programs. They're self interested. Not surprisingly, I think here's where we can change this dysfunction. And been lucky to be collaborating with a group of of 30 people in in a project at Stanford right now being led by by Mitchell Stevens, where we're really trying to say, what would what the new economics of learning be, if you were trying to think about moving from an educated society where education happens at the start of a career to a learning society? Where learning happens throughout a career. I think you can imagine sets of structures that allow us to both reduce risk through more effective information sharing, through better signaling, but also to share risk. You can imagine financial structures, for example, where if employer invests in an employee and training employee and the employee leaves that the employer gets a tax credit, regardless of whether the employee is still at the firm, proportionate to the amount somebody's income rises, which, by the way, is something you could fund out of the greater tax revenues that you get when people are earning more. So there's structures that we could put in place that would allow us to reduce risk, having better Labor Market Information Systems, having better mechanisms for employers to share data on the training that they're investing into their workers. Having better assessments of credentials, are all mechanisms that we can put in place, and some of which, you know, we're trying to advance at the institute.  Julian Alssid: I almost feel like we haven't even gotten to AI yet. So speaking of which, you know, as AI is sort of rapidly, you know, permeating all. How do you see, how do you see it impacting today and the future of work and learning, you know, short and long term, and, and, and, you know, and kind of the construct you're laying out for us.  Matt Sigelman: So there's a couple of effects that we've been we've been studying one that I've been working on, together with, with Mike Fenlon, who was formerly the the Chief Human Resources Officer at PwC, and with Joe Fuller, professor at Harvard Business School, and a colleague on the Harvard Project on the Workforce. And what we've been looking at is how AI is going to reshape learning curves. It turns out, what we found from our research that a lot of the impacts that we've been sort of thinking about as impacts on on jobs or on tasks are really about how AI shifts expertise, how much expertise is required to get into a job, and how expertise gets accrued over the course of a job, essentially, what's the shape of a learning curve? And what we find is that there are some kinds of jobs where learning curves tend to be relatively flat, where there's a fair amount of skill that's required to get into a job, but once you get into a job, productivity remains fairly constant, no matter the level of experience that you accrue. Think about the job of a bus driver, for example. Maybe not a great example, because it's probably not going to be particularly impacted by AI, but just as an example of a job with a flat learning curve, those jobs are worth, by the way, sort of paying attention to, because those are jobs where the hypothesis that we sometimes hear about how AI is going to be the worker best friend, they're going to democratize knowledge. They're going to help overcome barriers to access. Those are the kinds of jobs where, where that's likely to be the case, where, essentially, you needed domain expertise to get in. You needed language proficiency, whatever it was. But you know, once you've got that, you can do that job. And so I think those are going to be places where we may, in fact, see AI reduce the level of expertise that's needed, but there's a lot of other jobs where what you see is a pretty steep learning curve over time. And what that says is that expertise is accrued over time, the productivity rises over time. And what you can then do is look at the differences in skills that are required at the entry level versus for somebody who's highly experienced in the domain and in many of those kinds of jobs. You see is the AI impacts are much more the AI overlaps are much more pronounced at the entry level. That says in big parts of the economy, the entry level opportunity landscape is going to dwindle. Think about what that means, both for people who are educating and training people, and what it means on the other side, for employers, for for educators, it says, what it mean to train people to start their careers in the middle, as opposed to at the beginning, when people are going to need that much more proficiency, when we're already struggling to make effective connections between education and work, and now we need to to raise the bar the. That's a critical challenge. On the other hand, think about what this means for an employer, where whole organizations right now are shaped around the idea that you hire a whole bunch of people on the entry level, and over time, that field narrows itself, and a few people get, you know, at each stage kept promoted up, and so you have organizational structures that are essentially pyramid in shape. Now of a sudden, you're thinking about diamond shaped organizations where you really don't need a lot of people at the entry level. Okay, fair enough. But how do you get talent when your whole pipeline has always depended on having lots of entry level people who are getting early experiences, and through those experiences becoming expert. So that's one of the AI impacts that we've been thinking a lot about. We have another branch of research we've been looking at, as you might imagine, we spend a lot of time thinking about skills, and so we've been trying to not only translate a lot of the the early models of AI impacts, which are about tasks, into skills, what are the, what's the capabilities that people need in order to do work in an AI era, but specifically, trying to intermediate this tug of war between, you know, are, is AI going to automate work or augment work? And so, you know, it's sort of like the the taste great, less filling of our age. I think the three of us are old enough to remember that. I don't know if our listeners are, but in any case, you know, there's been when you think about skills. Are, you know, are some of these skills going to get replaced, or is AI going to help us do them better? And so we've developed a set of data models to help us sort of think through this. And here's the fascinating thing, we approached this as trying to intermediate a tug of war. And a funny thing happened. What we found was that some of the same skills showed up atop both of our models. In other words, we were saying, Here's, you know, take a given skill and and it's, it's the top of most likely to to get automated away, and in top of the most likely to get augmented by AI. And so we, first we looked at, we're like, okay, we screwed something up royally, because, like, we were trying to, like, intermediate and exactly, and then, and then, when we looked into it, what we realized is there are sets of skills think about as an example data analysis, where AI increases our efficiency and it increases our effectiveness. And those kinds of skills are going to be a new power skills for the 21st century. And so we've been thinking a lot about, how do we make sure that everyone has those new power skills? Interestingly enough, even things like writing are among those new power skills. You know, the the exercise of writing looks very different in an AI era, but the ability to craft narrative, to shape logic, actually become more important, not less, because that's how we we leverage AI effectively so and then finally, as we think about AI, and it's both the disruptions that it portends, but also the opportunities that it opens, again, we've been thinking about skills. So if you start again with this idea that AI is going to change the skills that are required in a given job because some of the skills are no longer needed, other skills become more important. And then put that alongside something which I said earlier in our conversation, that the way right now, you get from job to job is by building on the skills that you've been using and bridging the gaps and using that to be able to to step across to a new job. Well, wait a second, if the skills that you're using in any given job are going to be different. What it means is that your next job, the transitions, the pathways by which people move from job job, actually get totally reshaped as well. Think about...give you an example right now, in the world of machining, you go from being a machinist to being a computer numerical control press operator to being a CNC programmer. Well, you can imagine that the distance between some of those may become, you know, for example, the distance from being a machinist to being a programmer may actually, you know, get compressed as CNC programming becomes easier to do. On the other hand, what that may mean is that a ladder that might have existed between CNC programming and actual software development and computer programming may get stretched for pulled further apart. So, you know, it doesn't mean that the transitions are no longer available, but there'll be different transitions, and so the kind of training that we've been used to providing to help people bridge gaps is going to need to be rethought.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Circling back what you just said connects back to something I feel like that you had said earlier. And I was really intrigued by regarding, you know, this, this notion that, through AI really access, and frankly, I guess it's true of the internet in some cases too, just that the access to knowledge is ever present, right? Like the ability to rapidly obtain information about any topic is, it's kind of limitless. And what that means for that kind of diamond shaped job market, I think, is really fascinating, and it's what it's really intriguing to me. Like, what happens when knowledge might be ever present, but the skills needed to be engaging at that next level up are things like communication, conflict resolution, negotiation, right, skills that are perhaps that can't be honed with AI alone. And so what you just said about like the gap between, or how you bridge the gaps between these skills might look and feel really different. Just feels, I feel like that's where, where we're headed now is, what does it look like? And I don't have the answer, but this is one thing I've been wrestling with. Is, is, what does it look like to build training models and education models that help people, you know, kind of get to that next level a little earlier with those other skills, beyond the knowledge acquisition component. I don't know if that rings true to you, Matt, but that's just been on my mind.    Matt Sigelman: Absolutely two things that I'll say there. You know, one, I've been thinking a lot recently about artificial intelligence and human intelligence, and how, in a lot of ways, they're almost exactly opposite each other. AI is, you know, what we're seeing with generative AI in particular is, is that Gen AI is, is phenomenally powerful as a pattern recognition engine, but and the human brain is a powerful human, you know, pattern recognition engine as well, but, but here's, here's why it's worth distinguishing them. Generative AI works by just sort of crunching tremendous amounts of data and looking for the patterns within those data. And so in a lot of ways, it's totally agnostic to content. It just crunching through it and seeing the relationships. And eventually, if you put enough into it, it can confine patterns and relationships. Again, human brain is a great pattern recognition machine as well. But think about your brain works. Your brain is not actually sort of chewing through every relationship that it could possibly look for. Your brain works exactly opposite. What we're really, really good at is filtering, is being able to very quickly, almost immediately, seeing the most salient relationships the human brain works by constructing narrative. I can give you a picture and you will immediately zoom in on the most salient thing in that picture, the thing that's that's most unusual, because you can see the story. And I think when we kind of see those kinds of differences, means understanding the difference between generative AI and and and human intelligence, we can understand how the two can complement each other, and what kinds of domains will be most complimentary.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, no, that makes a lot of sense.  Julian Alssid: It really feels a bit like what you're saying is we need to, we need to do what we do really well, but understand how to work with the technology.  Matt Sigelman: That means as well that we need to have the ability. We need to have both sets of abilities. You know, I keep hearing something. I keep hearing people say, Well, gee, you know, we're not going to need to code anymore, because generative AI is going to do it for us. Where we're not going to do data analytics because the generative AI is going to do it for us. We will need fewer specialists, but actually, many more of us will need coding skills. Many more of us will need data analytics skills. The analogy I would offer here is, is Microsoft Excel, which, in a way, sort of automated some of the work that that, you know, kind of ledger accountants did and the like. Think about all the ways that we each use data today, whether it's to create charts, whether it's to, you know, kind of build a discounted cash flow analysis, whatever it may be, and think about what that would have been like to do without Excel. The answer is, you wouldn't have done it. And so many more of us are using data today than we could have done 40 years ago precisely because we have that automation that's available to us. So whenever you hear someone say, Hey, we're not gonna need to know how to code, it's just flat out wrong. You know, we need to make sure that we're building those kinds of basic proficiencies across the workforce, even if many, few of us may need to be dedicated software developers.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So I feel like you're taking us in in this direction through through your last comment there, Matt, but you know, one thing we like to ask on this show, given that it's called Work Forces, is really a question about, really, what are your recommendations for how our our audience can become forces in navigating, or helping others to navigate career progression and advancement in you know what we've discussed here today as a really a shifting, ever changing landscape.  Matt Sigelman:The key to that Kaitlin is in the words you just used, which is progression we tend to think about jobs, and particularly those of of our listeners who are supporting workers and learners and making effective transitions. Getting to that next job is such a, you know, often a big challenge, and it feels like a big triumph in and of itself. And I think a lot of what I would recommend is that we give more attention to the downstream consequences of each job. Where does How did to job? How do jobs connect to one another? One of the things that we've done at the Institute is we built a database of 65 million US workers career histories. Represents about 40% of the US workforce, and it's given us a very powerful way of understanding the twist, turns and tangles that run through people's careers, essentially the cow paths that that lead from one job to the next, and what it's given us a really good sense for is how much variance there is, how easy it is for people to get stuck in the one hand, but also how proximate people often are to jobs that lead to much greater opportunity.  Matt Sigelman: You know, one of the things that I've often heard from people in the workforce field, and that depresses me no end, is that people with college degrees have careers and people who don't have jobs. And the reason why it upsets me so much is that the difference to me between a job and a career is that a career has a directionality to it. It has a vector. It has momentum. We recently did a report where we analyzed the careers of several million people who went straight from high school to work, and we looked at what happened to them over 20 years, and what we were able to find, what we're able to see, rather, is that there are very predictable paths to success. First of all, we found that it's true, you don't need to go to college to have a good career. We found that the top 20% of people who go straight to work after high school wind up out earning the median college graduate. But on the other hand, and we found that certain first jobs we called Launchpad Jobs, make you literally four times more likely to wind up as a top earner by the time you're 40. But we also found that there are some kinds of first jobs that make you four times more likely to wind up in or close to poverty. And here's the thing that, again, is most important to bear in mind: many of those good starts and many of the bad starts actually look the same. They pay the same and so think about what that means for somebody who's coming out of high school, they're saying, Okay, well, I could wind up seating people at a restaurant and making $23,000 a year. I can wind up as a cook in the back and make $24,000 extra, slightly more. And one of those kids, the former, will be making, if you sort of follow all the different directions that happen over their career, on average, will be making over $70,000 a year by the time they're 40, and the other one making in the low 30s, and we are providing no good insight into that. So that ability to think not just about the next job, but about what happens after that job, and what are the skills that will prepare somebody to make that next transition is, I think, one of the biggest transformations that we can we can have as as workforce professionals.  Julian Alssid: Wow, Matt, it's been just incredible hearing you your download on all the these multiple aspects to what we're seeing now and and bring some clarity to the landscape. How can people follow your work? And I know you've touched on several different reports and research projects. What's you know, just as we wind down, we'd like to leave people with, you know, good, actionable info.  Matt Sigelman: Well, I hope people will visit our website, Burning Glass Institute.org, all one word, and there's a place where you can sign up to join our mailing list, and we keep people abreast of the research that's coming out.  Julian Alssid: Well, thank you so much for taking the time to meet with us today. This has really been a master class?  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes. Thank you so much for talking about different directions of your research.  Matt Sigelman: So enjoyed this.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell, you can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Jean Eddy, President & CEO of American Student Assistance (ASA), discusses how middle and high school students can develop career awareness and gain meaningful workplace experiences before college. Drawing on research showing middle school as the optimal window for career exploration, Eddy details ASA's digital platform approach, which reaches 15 million students through engaging, mobile-based tools that help them discover interests and connect to potential career paths. She emphasizes the critical "testing and trying" phase where students need hands-on experiences, highlighting ASA's grant-making initiatives that fund intermediary organizations bridging gaps between schools and employers. The conversation explores scaling these efforts through policy engagement and community buy-in, with Eddy advocating for making career exploration an integral part of education rather than a disconnected add-on for teachers while offering practical collaboration strategies for all stakeholders to help students find paths that "make their hearts sing." Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. We've spent much of our time on this podcast exploring learning and career pathways, especially for college students and adults, and while those conversations are important, we also know that it helps learners when they begin a process of career exploration much earlier on in their academic journeys. By the time someone gets to college, it can often be too late for foundational career exploration. We need to help K-12 learners develop an awareness and curiosity of various career options, get them age appropriate experience and help them link their academic interests to the world of work.  Julian Alssid: That's right, Kaitlin, and it's something we both know firsthand. We both started our careers in innovative high schools, where we each designed project based and experiential learning opportunities intentionally integrated with internships and real world experiences. We so, you know, we understand the complexities of this work, particularly figuring out the right level of exposure to workplace skills and experiences for young people, you know, how do we best help them explore, gain experience, build social capital and discover their likes and dislikes?  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, it is about developing the skills and awareness learners need to navigate the world of work and thinking about practical implementation. It's about working with employers who can meaningfully support this process, and about providing educators with the time and creative space to make these integrated learning experiences happen.  Julian Alssid: This is a complex topic to unpack, and that's why we're so pleased to have Jean Eddie with us today as President & CEO of American student assistance, or ASA, she's leading the charge in changing how kids learn about careers and prepare for their futures. Jean is an accomplished leader with over 30 years of experience in higher ed, and has held leadership positions at Rhode Island School of Design, Brandeis University, and Northeastern University. She's a nationally recognized speaker and subject matter expert, cited frequently in major publications and a contributor to forbes.com Jean is deeply committed to student success and is the author of crisis proofing today's learners, and co host of The One Question Podcast with Michael Horn, who was a recent guest on Work Forces. Jean, we're looking forward to discussing ASA's innovative approaches to career readiness for middle and high school students, and how you're reaching them in new and novel ways. Welcome to Work Forces. Jean Eddy: So happy to be here, looking forward to the conversation. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, so are we Jean. It's such a pleasure to be with you today. So as we dive into today's conversation, can you please tell us more about your background and what led you to ASA?  Jean Eddy: What is interesting is I met a colleague this morning for breakfast, quite early, and I worked with that person at one of the colleges that you mentioned. We were talking about the fact that we worked with a lot of young people who are on a college campus, and they really didn't know why they were there. And my colleague was basically saying that he oftentimes felt as though he was taking care of young people who were really not they couldn't find their own way. And I would have to say it reminded me of my own journey. I was in high school, and no one approached me about what was next. Never talked about it, never got prepared for it, etc. And if it weren't for the fact that I ended up, after leaving high school, going to a community college, I was lucky, you know, I met people who were interested in me and wanted to kind of show me some way or some path. Who knows where I'd be right now. But I guess, you know, I ended up in higher education because I was so taken with my own experience at a community college. And I worked in higher ed, as you said, for a number of years, but I worked with a lot of young people who really didn't know why they were in college, and I would say that some of them really should have taken another path, and instead, went on to college, spent an awful lot of money that they didn't need to spend, and then ended up with quite a bit of debt that they had to repay somehow, some way. So fast forward now to ASA. I became involved with ASA because ASA is a federal guarantor, and as a person who worked in higher ed I was on the board of ASA for a number of years. And why, why I was interested in ASA is because of the fact. They were really committed to helping young people. It was a very personal relationship, which with a lot of guarantors. It was not but at ASA, it was. And I stayed committed because I was so interested in how they interacted with students. When I was asked to become the CEO here, which was eight years ago now, we were talking about how we could think about working with young people before a problem arose. What we were doing was basically trying to put a band aid on something at the end of the day, rather than getting in front of the problem to see what we could do about that. So we did an awful lot of research and found out that the best time to really talk about careers was in middle school, and that seems kind of young, you know, sixth grade, seventh grade, but what we found was is that kids who are in that age bracket are really open to exploration. They aren't hardwired that they want to do this or they want to do that, and furthermore, their friends haven't made such a huge impact on them that they don't they were willing to go and find their own way. So we then did research about, how do we interact with these young people? What's the best way to do that? And we tried a number of things, but at the end of the day, what we found was we needed to kids meet kids where they are, and that's on a mobile device that's on their cell phone. So like it or not, 97% of the kids who are between 13 and 18 year old, 18 years old, have a cell phone. And so we created mobile, friendly programs that would allow young people to, first off, go out and have fun. Because to me, learning is all about fun. Let's start with that. It doesn't need to be something that's imposed and sometimes treacherous. It's rather what can be fun. So the first thing we developed was something that allowed a young person to have fun, but to basically do puzzles and games, which actually came up with kind of an indicator of things that somebody was good at, but moreover what they liked to do. And then we showed them all kinds of ways to be able to get to that in a successful career. And it's not to say at someone who's in the sixth or seventh grade is saying I'm going to be an X, but rather, I'm interested in these things. And let's see all the possibilities for if you're interested in this, what is possible. And then we went on to build more programs that allowed kids to test and try, which is really key here, testing and trying, having them figure out, maybe I like this, but is there some aspect of it that I really can't do or I don't want to do? And so when we develop these programs, testing and trying, really came in in high school, and the reason for that is by the time students leave high school. We want them to have a plan. And so it's not that again, that they have a road that's absolutely mapped out, but rather, this is the this is the path I can take to see what might come of this, to see what might come with what I love to do with what I'm good at. And can I be able to relate this to that job, that career, that pathway? Julian Alssid: Great to hear the bit about your journey and and the genesis of ASA. So. So now, what are the Could you give us an overview where you are now at ASA with the types of initiatives that you're focused on, and what are the key problems that you know you're looking to, the key challenges or problems you're looking to solve. Jean Eddy: So, you know, the initiatives that we are working on currently, you know, I mentioned the digital we have four digital programs which really bring students from the discovery phase right on through the testing and trying, you know, getting a mentor, getting an apprenticeship, understanding how to be able to get ready for to dress for success, all those kinds of things. There are many, many things kids can do there. We have about 15 million kids on our platforms at any given time. They're between 13 and 18 years old. But in addition to that, we also work with schools, school districts and states who are interested in infusing this kind of a career exploration into their into their curriculum. The biggest one I always talk about is Delaware. Delaware is the nice sized state you can get your arms around it. So we worked with a couple of other funders to basically put career exploration into middle schools in Delaware, so every kid in Delaware has an opportunity to do this kind of career exploration. But I think the biggest challenge we have is the next step is the testing and trying. Because I would have to say, I. So we need employers to be able to help us do that. But any employer will tell you, and I've talked with many, they don't have the infrastructure to be able to provide that, and sometimes they are. They are quite hesitant to get into this, because, again, they don't have the staff, they don't have the know how, and they cannot figure out how to connect with the school district with a system. So a lot of our initiatives are now working with intermediaries places who basically go in and they take care of the things that need to happen at the high school and things that need to happen with the employer, and we do a lot of funding in those respects. My favorite is the caps network. They are national, and they basically give they work with employers and they work with schools to be able to have kids have first hand experiences in how a career could actually map out in a given field. They are beyond impressive. I could talk about them all day, but there are many of them. There are also states who get involved in this, and I will pick on Rhode Island native Rhode Islander, we've worked with skills for Rhode Island for a number of years. They are great intermediaries in basically bringing employers and schools together to provide apprenticeships and internships for young people to test and try. So I think that that is, that is, I'm going to say next big Frontier, we need more opportunities to connect employers and schools in a way that makes sense, and it actually it works for everybody. Kaitlin LeMoine: That last point, you just ended on Jean right? I feel like that's where the rubber meets the road. And all of this work is like, how to make these, these relationships happen? What are you I know, you know you mentioned the intermediary work. What are some of the best practices, or like strategies that you know that are working well to bridge those gaps? Because I think that for so many you know whether, whether it's actually higher ed institutions, K 12 institutions, employers. It's about like, how do we bridge those worlds and in a scalable way?  Jean Eddy: So, I think that there are a few things, getting the word out is incredibly important, thought leadership and getting people to understand or or be able to see the kinds of opportunities that are available. But moreover, the funding that is available. There are a lot of programs out there right now, and we participate in some of these funds, which basically back financially, back opportunities for employers and schools to be able to come together and do this kind of work. And one thing I didn't mention before is the amount of grant making we do, and the grant making we do has everything to do with those kinds of opportunities. Historically, we've given up between $10 and $20 million a year, and it is to fund those kind of opportunities where they have not existed before, or to grow networks that you know have started off but have not how to reach across the country, because what we're trying to do is impact kids everywhere. You know, not only in the places that I think, with the northeast, we have so many colleges and universities, we are so focused on kind of these connections, but there are parts of the country where that's not the case, and particularly in the middle of the country. You know, it's really up to us to do a better job in connecting those intermediaries who work in those places to provide opportunities for young people who otherwise are thinking, Okay, what do I do next? You know, what are my opportunities? And they're not as I would not say that there's not a rich as rich of an offering as there could be, because kids just don't know.  Julian Alssid: So I get the scaling with, you know, your the digital stuff, and how that you know you've been able to reach so many young people directly, I guess my big question is, with the work, with the intermediaries, or the sort of the partnerships, how does that scale? And how do you ensure that it can live beyond the life of your grants? Like, how does this get baked in to what communities do, what educators do, what employers do, and then, how do you scale that? Jean Eddy: You know, we worked with the state of Massachusetts, and we funded a program that basically put pathways into high schools. It was one of Governor Baker's big initiatives and part of his legacy, I would have to say, the idea in doing some of these things. And we did it in Delaware as well. We did it in Rhode Island. As you start to fund these programs, you do it with the hope that you're working with policy makers who are going to encourage the state legislature to put it in the budget and have it move forward. And that has happened in every single one of these cases, I would have to say you have to have buy in, not only from the intermediary and the school and the employer, but you also need buy in with policy makers, because if they don't believe this. Yes, and they don't see, I'm going to say a road map for a state prospering. It's not going to go anyplace. But again, in the state of Massachusetts, we have an enormous shortage in the trades, construction, tech, skill trades, and we worked with the workforce council here to try and develop programs that would allow us to be able to, I'm going to say, start the pipeline for the jobs that we cannot fill and and that, I think, is really it's a problem that we have across the country. We have so many unfilled jobs right now, and I do believe that half the reason why we have that is because young people are not aware of those jobs, and we're not doing the best, the best work we could possibly do, in making sure they know it, but moreover, that they could try those things and find that they could fall in love with something that they didn't even know was existing.  Julian Alssid: Interestingly, we have been working in Massachusetts on the very topic, actually, with the community college and focused on manufacturing. And it's incredible the opportunities that are going wanting because kids and their families know nothing about these roles and the paths associated.  Jean Eddy: You know, just this morning, I was listening, I think it was on NPR, they were talking about the fact that there are wait lists for kids in technical high schools, and that they are trying to now impose a lottery system to let young people in, just that is such a telling update on on what is happening in this state. But moreover, in this country, we should be thinking about, how do we integrate the aspects of those vocational high schools into all of our high schools to give kids an opportunity. And I'm not saying that there aren't high schools who do that, because there are, but it usually requires either a principal or a super superintendent who has that drive and that feeling in their gut that this is what has to happen, and then they make it happen. We need more of that.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, and that combination of both of the leadership, and then, as you mentioned earlier, Gene, the financial backing as well, right to, like, especially for some of the more technical programs that require a lot of equipment and, like, lab space, right? I mean, like, the infrastructure required in some cases is is more significant than others. But like, that's another huge factor in this whole effort. One thing that I find really fascinating about the different digital solutions that ASA has built is it seems like it's a pretty low lift for schools to implement and for learners to engage with I'm curious, how do what's the split? I guess, that you see across like learners who engage with these tools on their own as individual users, versus who are introduced through a classroom like experience like, how do learners come to these materials? Maybe individually? How do they find that? Jean Eddy: So I would say, by and large, young people come to us directly. We have, obviously, connections with teachers, with superintendents, etc. And many will use our products as a way to have a hybrid experience. As far as career exploration is concerned, they are using it for that purpose. So they're basically saying, Go out to asa.org, look at this, look at that, etc. But by and large, most of it is coming from kids who come directly to us. And I think I when we first started talking, I talked about the fact that I wanted kids to have fun. So what we basically do, I'm going to say, we invade the time that young people are using their phones, which is on average, five hours a day, which is frightening to me, frankly. But we approach them and it's something that they can take it or leave it. So we go through Tiktok, Snapchat, Instagram, etc. We throw out these things. Invite kids to come in. They either do it or they don't. Most of the time, we find they do it. We have a high level of engagement, but it's got everything to do with that. They're seeing it as this is curious, this is fun, and then suddenly we're opening up another world to them, and then kids stay and so we have four platforms, and it's amazing to me that they keep going. And of course, again, it's all about fun. So I think that that is really the key to this, and what is really, really important, particularly with with young people in this, in this generation of young people, they want agency. They want to be able to say, I chose this. This is what I want to do without some someone imposing it on them. So I think that we've got to, you know, we're meeting them where they are. They have choice, and they're having fun. Kaitlin LeMoine: I really I appreciated your earlier insight about the research around this work, and like at what at what ages young people are most open to this exploration. Because it, I think it sometimes can feel like, the closer you get to the end of high school, it's like, what am I going to do? What am I going to do? Right in the creative kind of space to explore, it gets maybe a little bit more narrowed, and maybe, as you mentioned, influenced by peers. So I think it, I really love the the process of going from like this discovery phase, right, really, like a design process, and a lot of ways of thinking about like, just this, this discovery earlier on, and then narrowing as one goes through this journey.  Jean Eddy: When we first started investigating this, and the research that we did, and I met a number of wonderful faculty members at University of Virginia, New York, university, et cetera, having these conversations. And I was actually surprised people always talk about the fact that a toddler has this immense capacity to be able to take in information and process it. But likewise, kids who are in the 13-12, 13-14, years old, their brains are working pretty much the same way. So to be able to offer up all of this information, they're ready for it. They're ready to take it in which, you know, I absolutely love and one of the things we also found out, and one of the things that kind of pushed us to move earlier, is the fact that the stress level young of young people, particularly in high school. We monitor it. We've researched it. From the time they were freshmen in high school to their senior year, the level of stress goes up exponentially, so that now it's a case of, what am I going to do? How am I going to do it? Where am I going to find it? Etc, rather than okay, let's take a step back and really think about, what are the kinds of things that, you know, and I always use this phrase that makes your heart sing. You got to do this a long time. So what is it? Julian Alssid: Yeah, it's funny, when you talk about the stress levels going up, it's kind of like, you know, they're building muscle early on. And you know, it's these muscles that that, if you're going to be successful and happy and make your heart sing, you're going to have to figure out who you are and what do you like, and how does it fit, and how do you apply your skills, and how does it tie your academics, et cetera, et cetera.  Jean Eddy: Yeah, and it's a lot. It's a lot to ask a young person. It's really a lot. And all we're trying to do is help them kind of find a pathway to some of that, but it's not going to all magically appear at one point in time, which is why we have to start so early. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, and I think especially in a moment where you know, the job and career landscape seems to be like shifting beneath our feet, right? Like it's, I think, all to have digital tools that can help support those conversations, maybe kind of a little bit more agnostic to exactly what's happening at the you know, this present moment in time regarding AI, right? And the impact there. Like to be able to take a step back and just say, like, wait a minute, let's think about your interests, your passions, like transferable skills, right? Like that feels like a very productive place to start and to have that those digital solutions as a grounding tool in for that learner and for educators, I would imagine, would be very helpful as well.  Jean Eddy: Yeah, and it's just one step in the process. It certainly can't be the whole thing. And I would have to say, I applaud the role that teachers play in this. What I'm trying to figure out is, how can we integrate some of the things that we've learned into the system without overburdening overburdening teachers, because they have too much to do now I know that, and how are they supposed to change the curriculum, get things in there about career exploration rather than being an add on. You know, in some places again, have had to use policy makers, employers and entire communities to make this change. One of our grantees is out in Cajon Valley, right outside of San Francisco, and that Superintendent of Schools basically fervently believes in everything I've just been talking about, and their entire school system, from kindergarten right on through high school, embraces the thought of career exploration and how you connect courses that you take in high school to how you could use them in a career. I remember when I first heard about cajon Valley and the world of work, my immediate response was, these are our people. How do we find them? How do we connect with them? And we did. And then we started, you know, granting them funds so that they could add on to different school districts, which they've done. So it is possible, and it is it is strong. A movement.  Julian Alssid: So that's a perfect segue to a question that we ask all of our guests, gene which is so our audience really represents the various stakeholders that need to be a part of this, from the employers to the educators, hire secondary policy makers, etc, even ed tech people who need to be a part of this. So what practical steps can our audience take to become forces in initiating or supporting efforts to provide earlier opportunities for career exploration and exposure? Jean Eddy: One of the things we do when we do more and more and more of it, this is that we host meetings at major conferences across the country to be able to pull in those constituencies, to have conversations, we have to start conversations with everybody sitting in the room. So it's a case of, you know, employers, it's policy makers, it's educators, all of those people have to come together and we have to start a conversation. I would also say parents need to become involved in this as well. They need to be raising their hands in their school districts, talking to their representatives, talking to school committees about the things that really need to happen to give the young people the absolute best experience they can have. So that is certainly a start. But I would also say that we need to do a better job in getting the word out, as far as bringing people, everybody into opportunities where they can see this live. So I'll give you an example. There is a program out there called school links. It's in high schools across the country. That program right now, and you know, we are partnering with them. They have 160,000 employers on there, on their site. They're in school systems. They have employers there, and it gives them an opportunity to be able to go out and connect in relevant ways. We need to be doing more of that, and there are opportunities to do that. We ourselves are partnering with Jobs For the Future to basically create a site that kids can go to, employers can go to, teachers can go to policy makers can go to that will allow people to see available training programs, how you pay for it, how a major in college or a training program that you've been in can relate to a job. It allows employers to go in to see young people who have the credentials, but more over the interest in some of the jobs they offer. These kinds of things are going to bring everybody in. It's going to pull everybody in I should say, for those people who care about it, and I would say most of us care about it. Kaitlin LeMoine: Right, this is, this is an initiative, right, that I think, as we think about like learners, who then become part of our workers and broader society, everyone cares as we wind down our conversation today, Jean, this has been such an insightful conversation. We've learned a great deal. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Jean Eddy: Certainly go to asa.org there's an awful lot of information on that. And I am not, I am not plugging my book for any other reason than to say that it's an opportunity to see the thinking behind what we do. But moreover, some of the things we are doing in ways that people could get involved. You know, crisis proofing, today's learners, is the is the name of the book. And any proceeds for the book just go back into funding the things that we do for kids. So it's it's and I would also say it's an easy read. It doesn't sound like a textbook. It doesn't read like a textbook. It's a fairly easy read.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. Well, thank you so much for for sharing more about ASA, the initiatives that are top of mind for you, some of the initiatives that are have been a bit more long standing. We really appreciate your time today and look forward to continuing to follow your efforts. Jean Eddy: It's been my pleasure.  Julian Alssid: Thank you so much, Jean. Jean Eddy:  Thank you.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We are also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Description   Scott Carlson and Ned Laff, authors of "Hacking College," discuss how to craft a higher education experience that intentionally links student learning to future work and career success. They emphasize the necessity of a proactive and personalized approach to higher education, tapping into students' passions and hidden intellectualism. Carlson and Laff champion a field of study approach, empowering students to actively design their undergraduate degrees, unearth hidden job markets, and leverage faculty expertise. They underscore the significance of cultural and social capital, urging institutions to adapt and support this student-centric model. The conversation illuminates the ways that higher education administrators and faculty, and students themselves, can personalize the learning experience to ensure higher ed graduates are well-equipped to navigate diverse career opportunities. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning. Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. So Julian, I've noticed a real shift in our conversations lately, both with clients and on the podcast, we seem to be delving deeper into the complexities of the school-to-work transition, especially for young adults and for working adults. Julian Alssid: It's true. Kaitlin, and it really highlights the increasing complexity of that transition. The job market is constantly evolving, and it can be tough for students to figure out where they fit in, especially with so many opportunities hidden from public view. Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, exactly. I mean, it's a tall order for educators and institutions too. For example, faculty are being asked to wear many hats and skills like career advising can sometimes feel separate from their day to day roles and require new sets of tools and related training. Julian Alssid: Right? It's not just about helping students find a job, but about guiding them through a process of self discovery, exploration and network building and helping them understand their own interests and strengths and how those connect to real world opportunities. Kaitlin LeMoine: And that's where I think our guests today, Scott Carlson and Ned Laff, have some really valuable insights. They've literally written the book on this. It's called "Hacking College", and we're talking to them on the book's release date. Julian Alssid: Yes, and congratulations, guys. The book offers a framework for faculty and staff to help students take a more proactive and personalized approach to their college experience with a real focus on future careers and life goals. Kaitlin LeMoine: Though we'll ask Scott and Ned, to give their own background, Scott's a Senior Writer at The Chronicle of Higher Education, where he's been writing about the trends shaping higher education for over 25 years. As his LinkedIn profile states, he writes about where education is headed, how it serves or doesn't serve students and the public, and how the sector can stay relevant and resilient.  Julian Alssid: And Ned has over 35 years of experience in higher ed, helping students design successful undergraduate experiences. He's held leadership roles at numerous colleges and universities focused on academic advising, curriculum development and student engagement. Kaitlin LeMoine: Scott and Ned, welcome to Work Forces. Congratulations on the publication of this book, and we're excited to dive in with you today to learn more about Hacking College.  Ned Laff: Thank you so much.  Scott Carlson: Thanks for having us on. Julian Alssid: So to get the conversation started, love to hear a bit more about your respective backgrounds and how you came together to write this book.  Scott Carlson: Well, as Kaitlin had said, I was at The Chronicle for about 25 years. I've you know, in the years leading up to the pandemic, I was writing a lot about inequality and the path from college to work. I wrote a couple of Chronicle reports about the future of work and how students wind up getting jobs. And in writing some of this, these reports, and writing some of these stories, the follow up stories in The Chronicle, I had been getting a lot of notes from one Ned Laff who had been contacting me and had been working in this area for some time. And this is, in fact, how we got to know each other and got to meet each other, because Ned was just writing me over and over again about, oh, there's a better way. There's a better way to do this. I'll let him take the story from there. Ned Laff: Yeah, I have the work that I had been doing in higher ed. It's hard to call it something like advising. It's, it's in this middle, middle ground. I got into this when I was a grad student at the University of Illinois in Urbana, where I was working in a program called Individual Plans of Study, where students could design their own academic major, provided it couldn't be done in any of the colleges at the University of Illinois Urbana. And what we began to find out working is that students would be coming in and we would help them figure out how they could do essentially, the heart of an individual plan of study, but underneath the rubric of a major. And that started to raise questions in my mind about what is the nature of a college curriculum from the eyes of a student. What is the relationship of a college curriculum to the world of work? If there is this giant thing called the hidden job market, which is not advertised in career services, you don't see it on, you don't see it on. Indeed. You don't see it anywhere. And what does this mean in terms of student engagement, and how students can tap what they're genuinely interested in, what we call hidden intellectualism, and how they actually better engage learning and and the university they're at. And I would send Scott these. I'm like, probably about 100 emails a week, just nagging them. I got something here. I got something here. Just give me five minutes, though. Kaitlin LeMoine: You share about this in this, in the book, a little bit. We'd love to hear about how the book title came to be. And can you share a bit about the major challenges you hope to tackle when writing this book? Scott Carlson: Well, I think when I was writing some of that stuff for the Chronicle about the path from college to work, I was sort of following along the kind of narrative that everyone else sort of follows. And it's, you know, it's sort of about skills. What do you do with liberal arts education? How do you get students to land internships and all of that. And you know, really, one of the points that we that we make in hacking college is that a lot of that just sort of comes about by luck. For a lot of students, they just sort of happen to run into the right person who shows them how to play the game, or they come from a lot of social and cultural capital that sort of paves the way to where they want to go. And part of what we're trying to do with hacking college is to describe, kind of, the principles of how people wind up creating valuable undergraduate degrees. We're kind of looking at the whole issue of what is the empty college degree. You know, the empty college degree being sort of this degree that is a quote, unquote useful major, and then a bunch of other stuff in the degree that doesn't really knit together. And a lot of students graduate with that kind of degree. You know, we think this is like a huge part of what drives the national conversation about underemployment and of the value of college right now, and that emptiness being sort of the main problem there. And so with Hacking College, we're trying to tackle this, this question like, how do you actually get to something that's valuable? The term hacking comes from the notion that colleges sort of set up a bunch of rules around, you know, how do you get through? How do you, what do you major in? How do you, how do you fill up the rest of the undergraduate degree? And we're using the metaphor of hacking we're talking about like, how do you, how do you use these different structures that you find in college and then knit them together in a conscious way? How do you, how do you create opportunities and create a program that plays off the strengths that you already bring to college? This is a big part of the hacking metaphor there, coming out of the work of Bruce Schneier, who talks about how hacking is across society. People hack the tax code. People hack regulations, government regulations. People hack their lives in all sorts of ways. And of course, the wealthy hack college in hiring expensive college consultants, in, you know, in lining up opportunities for their children in all sorts of ways. How can we do this for students who don't bring these kinds of resources to the undergraduate experience? Julian Alssid: So Ned, you so in the book, I think you used the term earlier, you described approaching this undergraduate experience as a field of study.  Ned Laff: Yes. Julian Alssid: What does that mean? What exactly do you mean? And how does approaching college with that lens impact their learner experience?  Ned Laff: The interesting thing about using field of study is, I asked students once, can you tell me the difference between your college faculty and your high school faculty, and they couldn't and it was a wonderful experience, because what it meant was basically 90% of what faculty have to offer, what a university has to offer, is invisible. So when you look at faculty, faculty are field of study specialists. They aren't just, I'm a professor of English or I'm a professor of biology, they are I'm a professor of environmental biology, and I'm looking at the migration patterns of whales. And that is looking at it is defining a problem which we call in the book wicked problems, which demand a multi disciplinary approach. And how you approach those wicked problems depends on how you define it. So it's not unusual to hear students come out and say, I just graduated with my degree. I'm at Northwestern University. I actually heard this the other day at the gym. I'm at Northwestern University. I'm graduating, and I have no idea what I'm doing with my degree. I don't know how it adds up, because no one had ever asked them a question like this. I'm going to go into accounting. I have no idea what. Talking about, can you explain that to me? And as soon as you ask for that explanation, whole bunches of things open up. And among those things that open up are all this possibility in what Scott and I call the hidden job market. So the other part of field of study is that it brings an outward looking perspective into how students think inwardly about the college. When they begin to do this, what they realize is there's three basic components to an undergraduate education. When you look at most colleges, right, Gen Ed, the major, and what are you going to do with the rest of the hours, which is almost a third or more of your hours? Sometimes it could add up to 50 hours, because some courses in the gen ed count for the major. Well, when you look at a degree audit, it's except for the basic required courses. It's blank spaces to be filled in. How you fill that in is either going to lead to a profound field, the study for you, where you're using the that thing that you're interested in, your hidden, what we call hidden intellectualism, to guide the way you start looking at the learning opportunities on campus and filling these pieces in so they integrate and they fit together. So Gen Ed links with elective courses, which link with how you select what you want to take from this thing called the major department, and how you begin to identify faculty by their fields of specialty. So for instance, take psychology. There's developmental psychologists, there's social psychologists, there are psychologists that focus on Labor and Industrial Relations. There are cognitive psychologists, neuroscientists, all of those, if, depending on how you're going to look at the problem you want to study, all of those represent a different way of organizing the learning opportunities on campus. How you organize those learning opportunities that starts building out a field of study. But the other thing that's important in doing this is finding out who is doing that thing you want to do, because all of a sudden you walk out into the world, right? And this world, by the way, could be faculty doing their research and they're discovering things that, wow, if I was to do it all over again, I would be doing this for my course selection instead of that, because this is what I'm encountering right now, and students can bring that information back into how they begin to design what their curriculum or their course of study is, and that's the difference. It's an active design process, not from an advisor or a faculty member talking about degree requirements, but from a student designing the pieces of their curriculum. Julian Alssid: Just going back for a minute. I mean, this makes all the great sense and and I think anyone you know, so many of us can hearken back to that faculty or administrator that kind of helped us help the lights go off. But I guess I do wonder, and I don't know, maybe I'll love this one to you, Scott, this requires a bit of a mind shift for a lot of faculty. I mean, I don't think you know, they signed on to be the Career Counselor, the social networking expert, along with the, you know, the content expert and expert instructor. So A, what's your view about that? And B, how are we going to get from here to where you guys think we need to go?  Scott Carlson: I mean, I think what you're asking is sort of what I'm picking up from what you're asking is, you know, an implement, an implementation sort of factor here, like, how does this actually happen on a college campus, right? And so kind of part, you know, what we envision, you know, we wrote Hacking College in this very conversational style that allows anyone to read it and anyone to sort of adopt the practices there. Because, you know, on one hand, people you know, they sort of asked us, do you want after this, this book came out of a story that I wrote for The Chronicle called the crusade against terrible advising, right? And after the article came out, you know, Johns Hopkins Press and others had asked, Do you want to turn this into a book? Do you want to write a book about advising? And we really didn't want to write a book about advising. We wanted to write about these structures that cause students to fall off the path. And in writing the book, we wanted to write it in this accessible style, because we sort of felt that everyone on a campus should be able to read this and then work with the students that they, in particular, have in their orbit. That's how you're going to sort of increase, increase the touches that that students have with people on campus, right? We can't just sort of lay this all on advisors, or lay this all on faculty advisors, and in part of the part of implementing this, part of what we're getting at is that what the colleges can do is they can, they can sort of adopt this as a mind frame at the colleges where everyone is sort of speaking this field of study, language and instructing students how to how to go about this, how to talk to people, how to find these contacts that are going to help instruct them in how to design their undergraduate degree. Now, these can be faculty members, but we're hopeful that when the students do encounter the faculty members, when they are working with them. They're working with the faculty members that share this kind of passion, or this hidden intellectualism, or this area of interest, this place where they're going to have a head start on the conversation, because they're already into what the faculty are talking about. And those faculty members, members then will be motivated to work with those students, because those students are in the area that they're interested in. I mean, a big part of the social capital that we talk about in hacking college comes through cultural capital. You know, the conversation about social capital is everywhere in higher ed right now. It's about who you know, right? But a big point that we're making in hacking college is that what drives the social capital is the cultural capital. It's the stuff that you're bringing as a person to the other person in making this link across interests, hidden intellectualism, obsessions, that kind of thing. So this is, I think, a big key to sort of making these relationships work.  Ned Laff: And another part of it is this is very much the student is agent. So there's a student in doing this, they're creating networks. So it's not like I'm I am dependent on a faculty member. There could be three or four faculty members. There could be somebody in student affairs that they talk to, they go out on what we call this research, investigative inquiry, and start talking to people in the areas that they're interested in, and they're bringing information back there. Then they can sit, perhaps with somebody in an advising office and say, Here, I've got all this information. Now, how do I put the how do these pieces start to come together so that I can graduate under the requirements of a major, right? But design the pieces so it gets me to where I want to go. So it's very much a process of students building out their social capital, building out their cultural capital, learning how to network with people on campus and off campus, right? These are all the skills that everyone says people need, right? But they're doing this to design their undergraduate field of study. So in the process of doing their undergraduate education, all these mystical skills of oral communication and teamwork and stuff, they're all coming together, because what's driving it is the students' hidden intellectualism and their vocational purpose.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, I mean, I really appreciated in the in the book, when you know you had a line, it's not where you go to college, but how you do college that matters. That really stuck out to me. And I think, you know, as as we're thinking about the the social and cultural capital, and you know, one point in the book, you raise this concept of the hidden jobs, and you take it in a slightly different direction than I think we sometimes hear it talked about like it's not just about what's posted on LinkedIn as a job opportunity or not, but really that other definition around like pulling back the curtain of the world of work and helping learners really get an understanding of what are all the different job opportunities and career paths available in what might be. I mean, you, I love the scenario of working in a museum, right, like, but would love to, would love just to hear you talk a little bit more about that and what that, you know, what going down that path, through those hidden jobs, can really unearth for learners.  Ned Laff: You know, this is where students, all of a sudden, everything changes for them. I sent this one to Scott recently because I didn't know this existed. There is a national Egg Board. I mean, isn't that cool? It's it's a national organization, and what they deal with is eggs, the eggs you eat. So that means, when you think about it, they have to have a director, they have to have communications, they have to have organizational structure. There's all these things out here. You will never see the National Egg Board listed in a career services office. But that doesn't mean a student can't access it. So what happens is, everything is fair game. And part of the issue that we need to start thinking about is, we right it. Universities tend to define here's where the jobs are. Instead of listening to students and helping them realize, Oh, you want to do something like spoken word, and you want to help students. You want to help kids, in general, use that in order to build out their self esteem, get on their feet and start moving forward. Well, what major is that called, right? But when you start looking at it, you know, we have Google, type in Google, and all of a sudden, up comes all this information. And will people talk to you? Sometimes you have to tell students that they have to put a time limit on it, because once you get people talking to you about what they love to do, they'll go on and on and on, and that opens up possibilities, plus they didn't help the student network to other people doing similar types of things. So now what happens is the model is sort of like a good dissertation advisor who asks you that question and then says, here's how you go find the answer. Now, go come back and tell me what you're coming back with. And so that's how the process works. So it's faculty, it could be staff, it could be anything you hear on the radio, anything you see on TV, anything you read in a newspaper, a billboard that you see you're in yoga class and hear a conversation. All of that is fair game in this process, and it changes the whole nature of the job market and for students, when all of a sudden they say, oh my god, I just ran into somebody who's doing what I love, right? We tend, we tend to say, follow your passion. That's the line out there, right? But really it's following that hidden intellectualism and vocational purpose. The passion is just the emotive expression of, Oh, my God, this is real. Scott Carlson: One thing I would say is that you know this process that allows students to go out and discover these worlds that are important to them, you know, the Egg Board, or whatever. You know these the world of skiing, the world of anime. You know, it's not just good for the student in discovering something that's out there. I think it's also good. We also think that it's good for the institution. Yes, have you ever heard of the concept of the desire path? You see desire paths when you walk through a city and there's a, sort of a grassy place along a sidewalk, and then you see this sort of like dirt path that goes through the sidewalk to Earth, through the grass to another sidewalk on the other side. It's the people sort of making, this is the shortcut. This is how I want to get there. It's the way that people hack the urban urban infrastructure, in a sense, right? But it also shows others where they can cut across the grass to get to a place faster, right? And eventually, over time, in a lot of instances, the cities will just pave that part because that's where this that's where the people are going. Let's create it. Let's create an actual path there, right? And that's kind of what we're saying. Can happen with the colleges too. The students go out and they discover these worlds, and they're like, oh, I can use this to go to open up the world of eggs through the Egg Board, or I can go into anime, or I can go into museums, or what, what have you. And then the institution starts to discover, oh, these students are leading the way. They are blazing the path. It gives us an opportunity for other students to follow them. And then we can, we can institutionalize that path. We can create a way for students to get there easier, Ned Laff: And it also challenges, it also challenges our traditional way of thinking about things. I have an academic minute that I wrote it was the answer to the Dead Poets Society. Of course, you can study Shakespeare and go to medical school, more than likely you're going to end up being a much more empathetic doctor. But what students begin to discover when they start looking at the 5000 different ways you can actually get into medical school, it allows them to balance out their life. So I've had students who never had that semester of chemistry, physics, math and biology in the same semester because they discovered, wait, this is what's required to get into medical school. But there's other stuff. There is this whole thing of. How does culture affect health care? How do social social factors affect health care? Why is understanding language important? Because language involves not just speaking to somebody. It involves a culture of eating, a culture of behaving, a culture of everything all of there's so many different paths to get into medical school. Why do so many students only hear about one? Right? Because I remember reading an article that was in The Chronicle that people who are trying to defend history were saying, Wow, we have a couple of history majors who are interested in medical school, but they never ask this question. They never lay this out. How does understanding how to do historical research help you take a better patient history, and asking that question changes everything for a student, and allows them to plan things in a way that best fits all the all the gymnastics that are in their life.  Kaitlin LeMoine: I appreciated the use of the term translation chasm in your book, and I think you know whether that's talking about from a more liberal arts major to a more technical job, or, as you're saying, right? What does it look like to think about maybe something, maybe a graduate school opportunity where it's like, Wait, does this relate? And how and what really are those tangible skills, those cross functional skills, just interdisciplinary skills that kind of follow you wherever you go. I think you know is, is invaluable from a learner perspective, especially, you know, as we recognize that people tend to have more than one job, more than one career at this point, right? So like taking that skill and being able to apply it over and over again, and think about, wait a minute, how do these skills translate to this next opportunity, or to this maybe peripheral or tangential opera that might seem peripheral, peripheral, but actually maybe isn't. Scott Carlson: Yeah, and I think, I think that's an interesting point about the translation chasm there, because I think a lot of the students go in thinking like, well, major equals job, right? And so what do you do with history? What do you do with dance? What do you do with you know, art, right? Like, become an artist, become a dancer. You know, like, there's all sorts of ways to think about it under this framing. There's different ways to think about what your pathway can be. But you make a good point. One of the things that we write about in hacking College is the notion that you only gather those skills, and you only really sort of understand their meaning and their applicability if you know why you're sitting in the courses, if you know why you're there, if you know what it's leading to, or how you're sort of applying it, right it's skills. I think the conversation about skills in higher education right now is just so much about like, well, we're going to open these kids' heads, and then we're going to dump the skills in, and they're going to be great, and then somebody will hire them for those skills. Eventually we're going to go to skills based hiring, quote, unquote, right? And, you know, we just think that the whole scene is a lot more complicated than that, and requires a lot more human engagement, yeah, than all of that. It's just not this turnkey, like, let's give people skills and then go from there, right? You know. Ned Laff: Skills are always contextually based Kaitlin LeMoine: And the coaching that underlies what you're talking about. Ned Laff: Yes, and interestingly, I'm taking something from my background. It's a metaphorical step to take the skills that you've learned in one contextual setting, and then begin to apply them in another to see how they apply into other contextual studies. You're seeing these analogic connections. And this is, this is the other power of the field of study approach. Julian Alssid: Yeah, well, it's and it's interesting. We, like Kaitlin, and we talked quite a lot about, you know, that? I mean, it's really about ensuring that each of us has this kind of, you know, good understanding of what we bring to the table, both intellectually interest tech and in the end, the good jobs now, the more we can see from what's emerging here with tech and AI and such as is like, you know, it's like, kind of these jobs require the higher order thinking a good liberal arts program teaches, and the ability to apply yourself. So in a way, what you're talking about is a very organic way of just using this infrastructure that we have to move more in that direction. Ned Laff: Right and building off Gerry Graff's work on "Clueless in Academe", this idea of hidden intellectualism is important when I work with students or when I'm talking to a group of students, I always ask them this question, have you ever gone to a movie with your friend? Yes, and they all say yes. And then I ask them, but did you see the same movie? And then there's a certain line right. There's a certain area where they could say yes, they saw the same movie. But then when they start to get into that interpretive mood that that's not the same movie that everyone's seen. Well, this is the same thing that happens when a student is in a class, when they have clarified their hidden intellectualism, they know they're looking at the contextual nature of the skills and then shaping that through the lens of their hidden intellectualism into the field of study, the problem that they're going after.  Scott Carlson: Julian, I, you know, I would just say too that, like this is one of the things that it's one of the points of Hacking College, but it's also one of the things that we worry about a little bit. You know, Hacking College is, on one hand, really critical of a lot of the structures within, you know, the average four year institution or university, and what they're doing wrong with advising, and what's happening with, you know, the tracks that they're setting up, and how they're shoving students into boxes and all of that. But you know what you're talking about in terms of what we're talking about here, in terms of, how do students actually acquire skills? How do people actually learn to grow into the roles that they eventually occupy. You know, that's really, it's really individualistic and really hard work. You know, it's hard work on the part of the institution, too. And we do worry that, you know, that the national conversation that seeks to simplify this process, that is about like setting up pathways or putting up tracks, or, like, saying it's all about skills based hiring, or it's all about, like, you know, setting up these, these very, you know, rote pathways. You know, we just worry that that's not really going to get us where we want to go as a nation, in terms of a working nation, you know, there has to be this balance between offering people opportunities that are clear and may have clear pathways to them, but also, you know, giving people the opportunity to be entrepreneurial and to express the skills that are already within them and the desires that they have and the worlds that they want to enter. Julian Alssid: Okay, so just riffing off of that. Scott, one of the questions we like, always like to ask on each of our episodes is, you know, what can our what steps can our audience take to become forces, in this case, in hacking college? And you know, our audience is more the people who are trying to run these institutions and teach students and interested to hear your take on that, you guys. Scott Carlson: I, I'll start, and then I'll let Ned take it from there. But like one of the one of the things that Ned and I have thought about writing for The Chronicle as a follow up to hacking College, is as a story that says it's right in front of you. The answers are right in front of you, because there are so many times when we've gone to colleges and the institutions just are not even doing the basic work of getting off of campus, talking to the various constituents that are off campus, really engaging the students on what they really, really want there, that there are sort of unfilled internship positions out there, that you know, that the college is lined up, but no one's bothered to like connect the students to it. I think some of the work that has to be done right now is really low hanging fruit, and it is really just about getting people out of the out of the confined space of the campus, and getting them off campus and to discover what's out there, and to start to build these partnerships that are really fun. I think the other piece of it too is to try to engage the student around what we're talking about in the book, in terms of playing off of their playing off of what drives them. I mean, we're in a position right now where, you know, we've been talking about this for a couple of weeks, where we just have no idea where the world is going. This is where we end hacking college that you know, Zach Stein, he's this educational futurist that we quote in the last chapter says, you know, we just, even the elders, have no idea where the country is going, where education is going, what form it will take. So maybe we need a little less control around that, and we need to start to embrace this hacking concept that allows us to open it up a little bit more and maybe experiment a little bit more. That's what's coming. I think for higher education. Ned Laff: There's something very deliberate also in what we did with Hacking College, we focused on, Hi, here's a school that anyone can get into. Here's a community college that anyone can get into. These are not Ivy League colleges. They're not the high end flagship institutions, and all of a sudden they become hidden dream schools, because what students begin to see is that these, all these schools, have a wealth of learning opportunities on their campuses if they can see it well, the flip side is for college administrators to be able to see exactly the same thing when students begin to see when they begin to look at faculty as field of study specialists, the whole nature of the college changes. Everything changes. Well, if we can get faculty and administrators and staff to see the same thing, then what you begin to realize is, gosh, go wander into some of the offices or some of the labs on a community college, and all of a sudden you're going to see some of the craziest stuff going on, right? So there's this wealth out there. So here's all this wealth, and here's this thing of what our college is going to do to try to attract students or to show students that there's value and it's right in front of you. Change this is interesting, right? Change the conversations, right? So the last time I looked, and trust me, I look at this all the time, there is no budget line in change the kinds of conversations right. Change the conversations the students see themselves differently. They see the campus differently. They see all the opportunities around their campus differently. All of a sudden it's a wealth of opportunities. The other thing that's interesting is this, people will always ask me, why will these people that we send students out to talk to? We make them make these phone calls, this research, investigative interview? Why would people talk to them, and I tell them straight up, because they're all frustrated parents whose kids never listen to them, and they've got so much to share, and they really want to share it. And so the hack is, I'm not going through an HR gate. I'm going around the gate. I've taken a desired path. I'm connecting, I'm matching my interest with somebody else's interest, which then brings passion to passion, and all sorts of stuff begins to blow up. It's great. Kaitlin LeMoine: So I feel like we could have, we could have a full day's worth of conversation about this book, and I, and I hate to take us to the last question of our conversation today, but, but I will so you know, we've really enjoyed this conversation and really appreciate so many of you know so many of the topics that you raised and in this book. As we close out today, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow the work that you're doing? And Scott, you know, you mentioned the follow up piece you might be writing, and how can our listeners kind of remain in the loop?  Scott Carlson: I mean, I think, first of all, you know, just for me, I'll continue to write for The Chronicle. I have a column called The Edge, where we'll be hitting these topics on a regular basis, and we'll be out there on social media. I mean, social media is kind of a disaster these days, but I am on LinkedIn, so I'll be posting on that. And, you know, we'll just continue to have this. We're just going to continue to push this. I think, given the way that people are talking about college right now. We want to change that conversation. And we want to change the conversation around, what does it mean to be connected to the workforce? Yeah, that's been part of it. Ned Laff: So I'm on LinkedIn. Contact us. You know, we will gladly sit down, set up a time. We could do a Zoom talk. There's whole bunches of different ways to do this, and this is important for people in universities to understand you can take what already exists that you're already using, reshape the insides of it, and all of a sudden a master in college class becomes a class in mastering how to hack the college right same amount of time you already have it scheduled. You're not increasing any revenue. But the important thing is the effects on the students will be different. And so it's easy to do. It's like anyone who would like to continue the conversations just, just contact well. Julian Alssid: And I'm sure people will definitely want to continue the conversation. We're so excited to have been at the front end of this dialogue you're starting, I hope others will read the book I'm about 52% of the way through, judging by my bookmark here to the left. But thank you both so so much for joining us today. Good luck with this, and you know, we too look forward to being part of this conversation. Scott Carlson: Thank you both.  Ned Laff: Thanks so much.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify, please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.

Frederick Wehrle, Assistant Dean for Academic Innovation and Learning at UCLA Extension, discusses his research on using AI to optimize adult learning. Wehrle focuses on developing AI-powered instructional tools and approaching learning and course design from a neuroscience perspective. He shares practical strategies for educators and learners to keep pace with the changing needs of industry, including advice on the best ways to use AI for learning and development.    Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.   Julian Alssid: We spend a lot of time in the show, in our consulting engagements, talking about best practices for building effective, engaging programs and learning experiences for adult learners. It's a topic I find endlessly fascinating. Kaitlin LeMoine: As do I Julian, building programs grounded in the principles of andragogy, and allowing adult learners to demonstrate what they know and can do is so critical.  Julian Alssid: Couldn't agree more. And I often think back to our time at Southern New Hampshire University, where we helped to build College for America that project based, competency based online program was a real breakthrough moment in higher ed.  Kaitlin LeMoine: It really was. College for America was designed to reach adult learners who had many skills but had not previously earned a college degree. The program offered them a way to demonstrate mastery of competencies through projects aligned to real world deliverables that met academic requirements in an online and asynchronous format.  Julian Alssid: Our guest today is doing some really fascinating work in the space of adult learning and course design, taking the notion of learning, design and optimization to a whole new level.  Kaitlin LeMoine: He certainly is. We're excited to have Frederic Wehrle on the show with us today. He's the Assistant Dean for Academic Innovation and Learning at UCLA Extension. Frederick joined UCLA in 2023 after serving at UC Berkeley Extension since 2018. Before immigrating to the US, Frederick led accreditation and International Relations at business schools in Paris, France. He's held faculty and administrative positions in France and in the US, and served as an advisor and mentor to startups, nonprofit organizations and universities worldwide. Grounded in research on innate and in learned behavior, Frederick focuses on developing AI powered instructional tools and applications of those tools to adult learning. Essentially, he's approaching learning from the perspective of neuroscience and exploring how we can optimize it. Welcome to Work Forces, Frederick.   Frederick Wehrle: Thank you. Thank you so much for having me, and thank you so much for the very kind intro. I'm very excited to be with you. Julian Alssid: Well, and we're excited to have you here as well, Frederick, welcome to get us rolling here. Caitlin said a bit about your background, but we'd love to hear in your own words about your background and what brought you to your work.   Frederick Wehrle: Most fundamentally, I would say my background is in behavioral sciences, human behavioral sciences. I specialized during my studies, actually, back in Germany, on behavioral ecology, neuroscience, anthropology and bioinformatics, and my key interest there was innate behavioral patterns and pre existing biases. So things that we are born with in terms of mental pathways, and I've been fortunate to be able to do a PhD in Paris at the Sorbonne where I was specializing in consumer behavior, which is kind of this subgroup of management and marketing sciences that actually looks how marketing and marketers are able to manipulate people, and then tries to explain how that works and give the tools to corporations and policy makers, I would say, to regulate if necessary. So when I was saying hey, I actually study, from a biology or biological perspective, how humans react without knowing that they do or act without knowing that they do, that was very interesting for the people in that field. And so that really was, let's say, my education background, I was able and lucky to become a faculty relatively early on in business schools in France, and put my my work to practice and apply a lot of this neuroscience into my teaching, and then very quickly, was asked to use it to design courses, design programs, to design entire degree programs, review the entire structure, if you want, of of schools through accreditation processes, build new types of partnerships and so on internationally. And when I got the opportunity to move to the US in 2018 there was an opportunity at UC Berkeley, and their continuing education division, extension division. I was very excited, because I've been I've been concerned with AI laying off millions of people or displacing millions of people, 10 years ago already, and I was mostly concerned because I didn't find anyone particularly at that time concerned. And I thought, with the background that I have and the theories that or the research I was pursuing, I'm effectively on to figuring out how we can make education at least three times more effective and efficient. So here in California, first at UC Berkeley and now at UCLA, this is really what I'm pursuing, and that is really figuring out how how to teach differently so that learning becomes much, much more effective.   Kaitlin LeMoine: So can you tell us a little bit about what your current research is focused on and what you're learning. I mean, I'm intrigued by the concept of, you know, making education at least three times more effective, right? So, like, let's, let's dive in there.   Frederick Wehrle: Despite the fact that it was over five years in the Bay Area and Silicon Valley and so on, I'm still humble. I'm only 3x ing. It not 10x ing. And yeah, they would not be happy. I couldn't pitch this to Google, probably. But the interesting perspective is that, unfortunately, let's say neuroscientists really haven't looked into how learning happens naturally through most of our lives, before the late 2000s, so about maybe 15 years ago or so, and actually started working on animals, and later figured it out with humans. And it's quite fascinating to see how that relatively recent research paints a very different picture of how we learn. For me that can be easiest understood if we think about what we're doing right now. So we're having a conversation. We're talking about things that we have some mental representation of education. Our brains are active. And in this situation, everything I'm saying, I don't have to repeat. You don't have to write it down and put it on a Quizlet card and learn it by heart and so on. Everything I say, maybe with one or two repetitions, you're able to assimilate. That's actually the proper term for this process in neuroscience, you assimilate that information into an active framework in your brain, a schema, and that active framework adapts to that new information, and so it's memorized. And so effectively, this process of learning, contrary to what still most education scientists and learning scientists believe, does not have any blockers. So the system that most education is still built around is a system of repetition. Because also in neuroscience, we were able to prove that if you have to learn something anew, completely anew, without any context and without any mental frameworks active or schemas active, you have to build those frameworks. You have to repeat, repeat, repeat, and that's how synaptic pathways are built and reinforced until they they're there, and that is usually now, if you look at the broader picture and child development or human development, that's really just how humans learn very early on in their childhood, like the famous light switch that you kids click 100 times until they figured out the principle of the light switch, right? But once you have that framework, once you like this basic pathway is built through repetition, and then, especially as you have kind of finalized building those frameworks, you're really switching most of the time, throughout your life, into this other pathway that has been discovered only more recently, which is information is just assimilated into active frameworks and those frameworks adapt unless You sit at school in a classroom that is sterile or at least out of context, and you learn from a book out of context, from a person out of context. And for me, the these things were, particularly, as I say, egregious, and became very, very clear when I was working in business schools back in France, or early on, even in my career, because in France, like in Germany, you have a system, or systems that are very popular, which is called apprenticeship models. And the most fascinating thing there is, is that you have a very large amount of students studying their entire three year bachelor program (Europe is three years for bachelor's,) or your two year master, either full time studying or in an apprenticeship where you work about 60% of the time and then you study about 40% of the time. What is fascinating about this is, all students finish on time. If I share this oftentimes here in the US, people like pause and scratch their heads and say, how's that possible? Especially like, there are institutions that really are extremely proud and adamant about saying that you really need to be full time otherwise, like you can't dedicate yourself and so on and so forth. And I think that's true. If what you're studying is sciences, where you actually spend a lot of time in sciences or even humanities and so on, but you are, like doing it, and you're preparing for university environment you want to become a researcher, then, yes, you're effectively doing an apprenticeship in in the university, but for many, many other fields, it doesn't make sense. So this is the background, if you want that I'm basing my work on. And I find it particularly fascinating to think about workforce development and to do this in continuing education, because the, let's say the good instructor and the good learning designer in this field already knows that the best and most efficient way to teach is to be able to kind of capture the students where they are, is to be able to understand who they are like with what knowledge do they come in there, and then, if it's in a life interaction likework with with what they bring to the table and their experiences, and organize in a way where they can share and practice with their experiences. So this is a very good background for me to to push that forward and formalize it a little more, to be honest, though, I must say, much more of a experimentalist than I'm a theorist. So I do spend much more of my time, or have over the last decade, experimenting, building the types of courses, running them, seeing how they work and so on, rather than spending my time writing literature reviews and contributing to a relatively set field of research, which is all based on a very different approach to education.  Julian Alssid: So given your your approach as an experimentalist here, and we're, you know, Kaitlin and I are also very grounded and in this kind of bringing together, this intersection of work and learning, which we think you know clearly has to be theoretical in many respects. But ultimately, people need a job. They need to apply themselves. And flashing forward to from eight years ago, when you saw the future, what do you see as some of the greatest opportunities for using generative AI in learning and course design, and also, conversely, what are some of the biggest challenges? Because it seems to be the story of the day.  Frederick Wehrle: Yes, it's the story of all our lives. So I'm actually hopeful that through the work I'm doing, also with colleagues, we're able to to provide some some way through this, I can maybe start with the challenges, because that's maybe top of mind for many people. In my experience, interestingly enough, I think the biggest challenge comes from a lot of resistance from the people that are the faculty, instructor slash expert, or also the instructional designers, the learning designers, who I think, like in many professions, don't feel very easy about the introduction of AI because it seems like it is getting at the core of what they are doing and what they're contributing. And having spent a lot of time, evidently, like overseeing these types of teams and being with a lot of colleagues, I realize it's justified in a certain way, because nobody has given many people that are not deeply into AI a framework and somewhat of a roadmap to where this all will go, and it's certainly not a goal of what this will look like at the end. So if you want as an as an experimentalist, the beauty here is that I was able to work out, and am working out with some colleagues of universities across the US a framework on how to effectively use generative AI for course content development, either in the role of a subject matter expert, so the AI can take the role of subject matter expert, and an instructional designer can actually go and build the entire baseline of a course, if you want, that then gets reviewed and analyzed by a human subject matter expert, or in the other form of an instructional designer, where subject matter expert has the help to effectively design the entire baseline of a course with generative AI. The point of us coming together is to figure out how to do this in a structured way, provide a framework how that looks like, and demonstrate how you get to a very high quality output and how much time that can save you, for example. Now, the interesting thing is, we're doing this because at that point the entire all the professions in the entire industry will say, like, okay, so we can actually get this if we do XYZ, if we follow that pathway. Now we can adopt it without having that much fear, because we see that all the jobs across the entire if you want production line are maintained. And the beauty is, once we have a little bit more time back on our clocks in all the different roles, we can now actually think of using a generative AI or just, let's say, the classroom to do other forms of education and things that we never have been able to do as much as we want to do. So if I talk to any instructional designer or learning designer, they're always unhappy about the fact that they never get to really roll out all the amazing methods of instructional design, or learning design, for all the activities they could do. Spend more times focusing on what different learning methods they could apply. Never spend enough time on the actual if you want learning structure, never spend enough time on case studies, or the assignments could be much better, much deeper, and so on and so forth. If I talk to faculty and subject matter experts, they always fall short on time in terms of sharing their research, sharing their practice, what they actually love, if they're teaching live, they really love the live interaction, right? But what they do is a lot of times it's just roll down a slide deck that they spend all that time preparing, then they're actually not really prepared to share anything else. So ultimately, the beauty there as a first step is that generative AI, by accelerating a lot of the groundwork, will be able to allow you, as an instructor, for example, to spend much more time engaging with the students. If you're able to build an entire learning experience relatively quickly. As a learning designer, then you can think about, what can we do beyond just the course production to make sure the learners have the opportunity to learn more effectively. And this is where I get particularly excited, because that's where it then comes the second part of AI. Now we can use AI to do something that is very much akin to the better way of learning, which is simulations, which is personalized content, which is activities that allow you to learn in a pseudo social environment, that is things that allow you to be much more applied, and so on and so forth. So we are. We're able to use generative AI to do groundwork, and then we're able to use generative AI with this neuroscientific background that I shared with you to create new formats of education.   Kaitlin LeMoine: It does occur to me, Frederick, as you're talking, and be curious as to your thoughts on this, that really you know you, you, we began this conversation with you, talking about the process of, for adult learners, of really assimilating existing information into or new information into an existing framework. And it occurs to me that, I mean, with, with AI, even if, like you said, right, it's maybe, maybe you've been aware of it for many, many years, and maybe now people have been aware of it for a year or so, adults are, I think, developing a new framework around AI. And so, how does you know? What is that work? What does it look like to apply your own kind of research, and the research around neuroscience and like related adult learning principles to this advent of this new age that we live in.   Frederick Wehrle: I think it's almost like a perfect storm on education and learning at the moment, and the pressure is as much on higher education, secondary education as it is on workforce development. I think the forces that are coming together is that leads to adult learners asking for more, asking for efficiency in learning, and are just not ready and willing to sit through content just cause, just because. Somebody put it into a framework. And it actually turns out, in my experience, that the educators themselves do not particularly enjoy producing the baseline content. They'd actually much rather spend the time and their time and energy on what is valuable. So in terms of AI and workforce development, I've two perspectives.  The first one is a lot of people need and want to learn more about AI and how that will impact their their work. And the second one is the environment. And AI enables them to learn anything that they need to move ahead and go further in their in their jobs, and stay ahead in their careers, or maybe even in certain situations, change their careers. So the first one how to learn about AI, I think the most critical part there is similar to what we're trying to do with that group of partner universities, institutions, organizations have to invest into, let's say, the experimenters in innovation labs and structures that will allow their organization to paint a picture of what it will look like in the future. Otherwise, you will always have that, that very strong resistance. And for you as a person, it is very difficult any individual kind of it's very difficult to to navigate the path of insecurity. And I think right now, with AI learning, there's so much out there. How do I stay informed? There's so much FOMO, and you feel like any hour you spend on that one thing, if you're interested in this, is a hour you lose, because then you didn't focus on the other thing. So you never feel on top of the situation. So I think there is a lot of work to be done by organizations to actually invest into people that are able to provide frameworks and an outlook of what it will look like if your organization is not doing that, and you are an individual, I always recommend actually going to events if you have the opportunity, be it virtual events or conferences or things like this in your field of expertise. For the last two years, all the places I've gone, anyone and everyone talks about AI anyways, it just gives you a much more concrete outlook on where things where things are going. And the third advice I give is actually take the time to watch at least the keynotes of all the large developer conferences that are going on throughout the year. So you want to hear the heads of Google and Meta and Microsoft and Apple, Nvidia and so on, talk about their releases and what's going to happen the second part, in terms of how you can use AI for your own education, I think there's, again, these two different aspects, from an organization or institutional perspective. You can use generative AI to actually create situations that make learning much more effective. So you can either use your student's existing mental framework and create content that makes them able to learn very quickly. Give you a quick example. Imagine you have 30 people that need to learn something, and instead of giving them one case study about a shoe factory, which nobody's working in a shoe factory, you actually allow the students or the learners to put in their job and cooperation into an AI or pre-configured GPT that builds you and each student an individualized case study, knowing that all case studies are based on the same learning objectives and the same kind of generic questions that they have to answer at the end, so every student will have an individualized, 10 page case study that really speaks to them, that they can understand very quickly, and then they can still discuss it with the instructor very effectively. The second thing is, you can use generative AI, particularly if you have the opportunity to do simulations, to create a situation where you can build mental frameworks. So if I want to train somebody up in something they have never experienced (nursing is an environment where this is particularly prevalent, or medical school as well), where you have to have these very, very long time practical and training periods, because certain cases just don't happen that often. I don't know a violent patient just doesn't happen every every week. So if you need to learn how that, how to handle that, you need to be able to experience it quite a bit of of times. And if you haven't experienced it, it's very difficult for you to learn the content of a textbook or so that explains to you how to handle this situation. So what you can do is you can create a simulation effectively. You simulate with generative AI, an interaction that is generated on the fly, where you just set some parameters effectively for the different actors in there, and you act out the situation. And you can interact with that verbally. And once you have that experience, then you can quote, unquote, hit the books and learn everything about it, and you will be able to learn it very quickly. Other example is project management scope out. This is an experiment I'm running at the moment, how to scope out a project. So what I'm trying to do is have a simulation with it's a startup that's called Convey. They have the possibility of you creating a virtual avatar, and that's based on a knowledge base, and you configure it however you want, and then the student just clicks on the link, takes on the role of a new member on the team, and that avatar is the boss of the department, you have to engage and talk with that boss and figure out what you need to scope out a new project. And the reality is, if you do this before learning anything about scoping a project, you will make every mistake in the world. You will feel terrible, especially if the character is made to be a little bit egregious and doesn't have much time, and it's like, okay, is this done? Do you need anything else? Then you really have an intense in five minutes, intense framework that is built through that experience. And then you read the text on how to scope a project, and everything will make sense instantaneously. And you can then even go back into the into the simulation. So that is actually interesting for for both the organizations, institutions, as well as the individual learners. AI has the possibility to personalize based on what you know and what exists in your brain, but also learning designers, particularly and instructional designers, can work with experts to create the situations you need to experience to learn more effectively.  So Frederick, while the world waits for you and your colleagues at the other universities to produce the road map from your perspective, what even more sort of practical steps can our audience take to become forces in keeping pace with the changing education and training needs of industry in particular, and and even be interesting to hear your take on like, I mean, part of what I spend a lot of time with is like playing around with different AI tools. Some seem to be better at this, and some seem to be better at that, and then a week later, this one's better at that, and this one's better at this. So can you offer just sort of very practical steps that people can take to be forces?  Kaitlin LeMoine: Recognizing they might change next week?   Julian Alssid: Yes. Thank you, Kaitlin. Frederick Wehrle: I think the biggest thing you can do, it's a change in mind set in, in how you approach your day and how you approach your work. Most of us are very much set in non-AI work processes. And I myself had to reconfigure my thinking, in my the way I approach any any problem or task, and think, how can I solve this with AI before I try anything else? And it's quite interesting to consider that. So to your point, there's different AI tools. I would absolutely recommend people, if they haven't done this before, they should definitely just take any LinkedIn learning or YouTube or Udemy intro to prompting, how do I use models, and get comfortable with using these models. But once you have that, I would not hesitate to use several models. I do as well, and try to have them at the very least, assist me, if not do the work for me. And the interesting perspective there is that I can configure the different bots so that they can take on different roles. So what I would recommend for anyone very practically is to have a virtual you so you effectively create a GPT or a Gem in Gemini that you configure to be equivalent to you, like your position, your context, upload examples of what you do, what you write, and so on and so forth. But especially give it the expertise, or configure it to be an expert in XYZ and have that role, because at that point you can actually use that as a second you to work with yourself, have it do things on your behalf. And the second thing that I use models very effectively with, and I know colleagues do as well, is when you use them as experts. So if you're in terms of designing, if you're doing learning design, instructional design, or if you're trying to develop your own skill set, you can give or create, either give the chat bot while you chat with it, or you create your own GPT or Gem that has a certain expertise, right? So you can create an expert instructional designer. You can create an expert subject matter expert in a field. You can create an expert colleague, and then you can actually engage, I mean, work with those experts to help you along the way with your tasks. In terms of keeping up into with the pace of the development. What that would allow you to do is to keep up as these tools evolve, as you mentioned, and that, for me, is almost more important than necessarily following the news or like being kind of on your social media, constantly trying or hunting after the latest information is to actually be practicing it, because then, through the practice, as the new updates roll out and so on, you feel comfortable integrating them into your into your toolkit. So these are, these are just the practical ways other things that that I do, and I think other colleagues do as well, in terms of keeping up to date, as I mentioned earlier, as conferences in your field, particularly, and configuring your, let's say, your news feed very consciously to follow things that that are relevant to your work environment, like a Google alerts you know where you can get the information that is very pertinent to your structure, but I felt mostly and most importantly, that's the change in mindset of using it first before you do anything else, being very comfortable that gets you very comfortable with it, that allows you to just be up to date and then seek out your community and the others that are excited about this within your industry, and try to connect on conferences, events, social networks, wherever you can.  Kaitlin LeMoine: It's really helpful to hear those very practical strategies, Frederick, and and it strikes me too, right, like the just how opposed, in some ways, the idea of, like a many year degree is relative to this type, this approach to learning these, these tools, which is really just like, kind of keep continuously up to speed and try things like, don't try to be the expert first, that just sticks out as pretty distinct with AI and kind of how to most efficiently learn these tools.  Frederick Wehrle: If you're trying to upskill yourself. And I think there's a lot of confusion out there right now. I think a lot of people have a lot of or procrastinate around using AI because it seems it seems complicated. It seems like a huge, huge task, and people read more about it than they use it, and especially like worried about your job, and how is it going to impact my job and so on and so forth. All of this gets quote, unquote. This is not really debunked, but all of this gets kind of resolved if you allow yourself to actually use it. I did it myself at a very early on, when ChatGPT came out, for example, and was readily available to spend quite a bit of time actually using it and realizing how much it can do what you're doing and how much it is better at your job than what you're doing in many respects. And so you panic. Then you don't sleep for two weeks until you have engaged with it enough, or two months. You reach a point of level of engagement with it where you see, oh, this is where my contribution lies. This is where my expertise comes in. This is what I will be doing in the future effectively, I might quickly say I always keep forgetting this, because it's never how I approached AI. Because of my background, there are a lot of people who use AI as a tool, so just know that that's not how it's built. If you're using AI as a tool or chat bot as a tool, you're effectively not using the user interface or the you're using it wrong in a certain way, because it was configured and built to be a conversational colleague and partner, right? An assistant. So it is made to understand and engage with you through full conversation. If you bark commands at it, it actually doesn't really know what to do with it, right? That's not how it was built. And so the output is not really good. And I've seen massive changes, and people like completely change their relation and engagement with AI, just from shifting their mindset to I'm not the expert, it is the expert, or at very least, it's a colleague, and I'm just treating it as if it was and I'm having a serious discussion with it. A colleague of mine always says he wants to challenge anyone on a panel, or anyone who is like giving a talk about AI or especially politicians and others, and ask them, Did you ever have a philosophical discussion with ChatGPT? And most of them haven't. And if you haven't, you probably have never actually discovered what this, what these things are capable of, and how you can engage with it. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, with all of that being said and thinking to the future, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Frederick, as it continues to unfold. Frederick Wehrle: I do usually post things that are interesting through my LinkedIn, so I'm very open. If people are interested, just reach out over LinkedIn. I do have a Medium account where I do put things from time to time, and I'm going to be publishing more, evidently, in terms of research papers as we as we move ahead with our framework, because we realize that that's where experimentation has to provide some output as well. We can't just keep it for ourselves. Julian Alssid: Well, thank you so much for taking the time today, Frederick, it's been really fascinating, and we certainly want to follow you and keep in touch. Frederick Wehrle: Appreciate that and very happy to be in touch as well. Thank you very much for having invited me.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you so much, Frederick. Really appreciate your time today. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell, you can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like, and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.

Matt Evans is CEO of Julius Education, a company that provides workforce technology tools to help job seekers and employers navigate fast-developing industries. Matt shares his background in emerging fields, including online learning and water technology, and his journey to Julius Education. He highlights the lack of detailed data on occupations, particularly in sectors like clean energy, where job titles are often inconsistently used. The conversation also explores the challenges and opportunities of using technology to provide granular, real-time data for effective workforce planning and engagement. Evans provides examples of successful partnerships and offers advice for building new models. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. So Julian, it's been fascinating to see how many of our recent conversations on the podcast and in our consulting projects keep coming back to the need for a dual customer approach to bridging talent gaps, one that provides employers and learners or job seekers with the tools they need to navigate fast developing industries.  Julian Alssid: Absolutely, Kaitlin. It's a topic that's becoming more and more critical, especially with a rapid emergence of AI transforming the labor market and emerging sectors like advanced manufacturing, life sciences and clean energy are being particularly impacted, and we're seeing employers in those sectors struggle to find qualified candidates and job seekers often don't know what jobs exist and have the opportunities out there aligned with their own interests.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely, that's right, and we've been hearing from so many of our guests about the growing mismatch between the skills that employers need and the skills that job seekers possess. This is especially true in fields that are being rapidly transformed by changing technologies and AI where the pace of change is accelerating and the skills gap is widening. Julian Alssid: Yeah, and it's not just about finding people with the right technical skills, but also about fostering those human skills like critical thinking, communication, and problem solving that are essential for success in any field. Those are the skills that will set people apart in an AI driven world. Kaitlin LeMoine: Definitely. And that's why we're so excited to have Matt Evans, CEO and co founder of Julius Education, join us today. Julius education is a workforce technology company that addresses the talent needs of fast moving industries such as energy, semiconductors, advanced manufacturing and others to help them keep pace with the rapidly changing economy using AI and machine learning, the company addresses talent gaps to make sure employers, learners and job seekers have the information they need to navigate these dynamic sectors.  Julian Alssid: Before Julius, Matt was a Senior Vice President at Pearson, where he led the Online Learning Division and served a large network of university partners and adult learners. He's also a co founder of Imagine H2O A leading water Technology Accelerator. So he knows a thing or two about fostering talent in emerging fields.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So without further ado, Matt, welcome to Work Forces. Matt Evans: Thank you. It's great to be here. Thanks so much for having me.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you for joining us. Welcome and we'd love for you to jump in now and to we'd love to hear more about your background and what brought you to your role at Julius Education.  Matt Evans: We are a workforce technology company. We use AI and machine learning to provide really, first of its kind, industry specific labor market intelligence and a suite of workforce tools to support fast moving industries keep up with the pace of change, as you alluded to Kaitlin. And so our work spans the industries that are really dynamic to the economy, from energy and semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, biotech, and we work with a really interesting set of partners from industry such as major employers and industry associations, to regional coalitions, to government agencies at the federal, state and and local level, who are all focused on this work in my background, as Julian you alluded to, has been in the education technology space for the past 20 years, and most Recently at Pearson at the same time, for the past 15 years or so, I've been on the board of this organization driving water technology innovation called Imagine H2O and what that experience really drove home for me was for all these critical industries, Water among them, but not exclusively. We need new technologies, we need new policies, we need new forms of capital for these industries to thrive. But there's this whole people component, which historically has not been getting the same level of attention, and so that's really was the the innovating spirit behind Julius particularly in these industries, which we alluded to Kaitlin, which are going through significant change, with new jobs coming on board, new skills required, new employers popping up, and so that really is the context for for the work that we do at. That Julius,  Julian Alssid: Yeah, well, it's certainly, it's certainly timely, Matt. I guess I'd love to hear, we'd love to hear some more about the problems that Julius is trying to address. You know, kind of digging a little bit further.  Matt Evans: The core problem that our partners are facing is they simply don't have the data on the occupations that they care most about. So when they're trying to answer questions like, What is the demand in my region, in my specific industry, for specific roles down the job title level, if they're trying to understand, what are the skills and credentials that employers are actually looking for. If they're trying to say what is the future going to look like across all these dimensions, they just don't have the data that they need to understand that. And so with our approach, using AI machine learning, we're able to ingest large unstructured data sets and give them a real time view in the way that their industry talks about these jobs for which data previously, there had not been any data currently available for it. So that's the kind of the core the core problem. I think the change context that Kaitlin was teeing up is certainly exacerbating a lot of this dynamic so with the ripples of technology through the industries that we've touched on that's creating real complexity for folks who are in key decision making. Seats to say, how do I align an ecosystem or my resources to drive workforce outcomes? How do I understand exactly what employers need today and also going forward for the jobs that are important to them, for other stakeholders, like learners and job seekers, they're trying to understand what is this field? What are these job titles? What are the career paths when I go to indeed.com What am I supposed to be putting in here? What are skills do I have today, and how do they transfer into this potentially exciting new industry for me? So those are some of the kind of core problems at the stakeholder level that we are, that we are seeing folks had historically been trying to get at this. This is not a new problem, even though it's been exacerbated now by accelerants and change in technology. You've been trying to get at this with legacy tools. So doing things like employer surveys is one approach to get data on the local labor market needs that is often challenging, just given response rates and also given latency of getting the data back. And these things, entries are moving so quickly that often that data is stale by the time the surveys come back. If it's kind of 12 or 18 month cycle, other approaches have been to say, hey, can we use legacy data sets that oftentimes are some version or tied somehow to Bureau of Labor Statistics, SOC data. That's a little wonky, but that that that sock code folks may be aware of on this podcast, but that's also challenging, because those are really economy wide views, and they don't work for the industries in which we are, which we're focused on, or, you know, third folks may have great data for their industry down five jobs deep, but what they're really need is something that goes 250 jobs deep for their particular industry, within energy or within semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, biotech, etc. So really, that core issue is where Julius comes in, and we are supporting our partners really, with this very detailed, industry specific depth of data, and so we just take a fundamentally different approach to to provide that for, again, for these occupations that the data just doesn't hasn't previously existed. Kaitlin LeMoine: What is your process for beginning to unearth that level of detailed data? Matt, as you said, right, there are so many legacy tools, but what does it look like to live in this space of kind of rapid change and transformation, and how do you go about remaining current in that. Matt Evans: It's almost setting up the data infrastructure is kind of the way we think about it. Because, as you're alluding to, it doesn't really do folks any good to have kind of a, just a one time snapshot about what's going on across these, these, these jobs or labor market data that they care about. It's really how does their repeatable and ongoing view into these, these data needs. And so that's where our where our own kind of proprietary data and AI classification models provide for that ongoing data infrastructure which provides a current view on an ongoing basis. So that really is kind of the foundational piece of it, which is it gives us that ongoing pulse and allows us to continue to keep up with the pace of change with these industries, not just for today, but going forward as well. Great. Kaitlin LeMoine: So I mean. Diving a little bit deeper, please tell us. What are some current projects that you're working on, either within clean energy or any other sector you'd like to discuss. And what are you learning? Matt Evans: In clean energy? There's, there's a ton of things to point to. Maybe I'll call out two or or three. One example at the state level, one of our wonderful partners is Mass CEC, which is the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, really leading the clean energy initiatives for for Massachusetts, they they're very focused on the workforce, in the workforce issues of the Commonwealth, and they've been through all the legacy tools that I was alluding to, the challenges in many of these kind of important sectors. In the clean energy economy, there's real fragmentation with how employers are talking about different roles. So they may employers may be using the same job title for for the same different job, excuse me, for different, for the same, for the same role, which is causing a lot of the lot of the complexity. So for Massachusetts, there's a priority set of occupations that they're trying to get much more precise on what's going on in labor market, one of which, for instance, is a role called an energy auditor, which is an essential role for energy efficiency and for high performance buildings, because they're the ones really helping to diagnose where there are energy inefficiencies and efficiencies within a within a minute building. It's also a critical role, because in some ways it's not just kind of the output of a lot of effort focused on energy efficiency. In some ways it's the upfront constraint to ensure this actually happening. It's a leading indicator to say, hey, if we have enough energy auditors or not, because if we don't, there's no way we can effectuate the rest of the energy efficiency strategy we need for for buildings. So it's a really, really key, key role. The challenge that we found in Massachusetts is that job is being called 40 different things by employers throughout the state that is, makes it so hard to get accurate understanding about what is employer demand for these roles, where in what county, skills certifications, all the kind of knock on on questions. So that would be kind of one really interesting example. There are other roles in that same kind of world, with with with mass CEC, like job titles, like assembler, which is can be a really important role in everything from electrical assembler, mechanical assembler, working assembling on kind of solar solar farms, but that catch all title or assembler really makes it kind of challenging to understand. Are we talking about junior level assemblers? Senior level assemblers? What kind of what segment of the clean energy economy actually talking to so you're trying to align the Massachusetts ecosystem with programming with dollars to serve employer needs. Getting much more precise about what we mean by these rules is really, really essential, and our data reveals that. So that so that would be another example of the work in Massachusetts as a learning. Julian Alssid: I can totally get the titles and the, you know, like and AI being really helpful and beginning to see through the different titles and find some common data grounding. Cutting across multiple industries, can you speak to other learnings that you that are transferable across industries.  Matt Evans: One other, I think, example that that is, I think we found really interesting is we do a lot of work with employers, utilities in particular, and they're really interested in looking around a corner to understand the skills of the future and how their workforce is going to be impacted by macro trends in the energy landscape. So we've done some really interesting work with a major industry association called EPRI, the Electric Power Research Institute, to develop a framework which helps lay out how the mega trends shaping the industry impact job cluster areas as well as impact down to specific occupational areas. And so, for instance, if you're looking at, say, the impact of EV adoption, well one obvious place where that's going to show up is in kind of field technicians or EV kind of focused technician roles, but it's also going to show up in other jobs which don't necessarily have EV in the job title. So skills, what is a someone who's running programs and utility in which EVs is a part? What kind of skills do they have related to EVs? What does a customer service rep need to know about EVs, as well as when they get when they get questions about that. So really thinking kind of beyond specific roles, but for the skills impact, and that kind of framework is certainly applicable to other industries, about how do you think about what those mega trends are, and then how those cascade down to specific roles? And then, obviously with the data infrastructure. You're seeing, tracking how that really is being expressed by employees, and are they closing the gap between what needed for the skills of the future by role and then? And actually, is it is actually happening?  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, I think that's a really interesting challenge. I mean, I guess it has been over the years, but I feel like it stands out more so than ever before, really, that, you know, there, it's like there are all these skills that you fall, that fall into many industries, and do employers recognize that? And do learners know and employees know how to talk about that? And is there that common understanding that, oh, well, the skills I'm using in this industry also apply in this one maybe with, like, this one little area of upskilling, right? Or something like, it feels like there's a lot of room for that, and room for building understanding and clarity around that transferability. Matt Evans: And also for learners and job seekers as well. So as I think, another kind of transferable application as well, to kind of bridge both your questions. We did some work with the DOE analyzing advanced manufacturing, the intersection advanced manufacturing, semiconductor roles, and how we can bring that to life in the right kind of career navigation solutions for understand, for folks to understand the progression pathways. So we looked at 100 different roles within the sector, and 250 different career pathways to really help people understand, what are these jobs, which I may have heard about, maybe I haven't really, what are the career pathways? What does that look like over time? And interestingly enough, over 50% of the jobs and did not require a four year, four year degree. And so that story also is, I think, an important one across many of the dynamic industries in which we work, certainly there are roles which require kind of higher level degrees, for sure, but there's also a lot of career pathways which which don't and so bringing that to life for learners and job seekers, I think, is really important aspect that certainly is transferable across a lot of these a lot of these sectors.  Julian Alssid: I'm interested that, looking at your website, and given your sort of intro, you're, you know, you're sort of similar to our consulting work, you know, sort of workforce development being this kind of, this intersection of work and learning. Be being multidisciplinary. It sounds like your kind of partnerships and partners and are being used by many different types of groups, from government intermediaries to, you know, employers and I'm assuming, educators and not individuals. Where are you seeing sort of the greatest pickup at this stage in terms of groups that are really looking to get on board with and bake this kind of data use into their work.  Matt Evans: The folks that are, I think, particularly focused on kind of the data and consuming that data infrastructure are folks that we think are almost these kind of conveners. So they're really convening stakeholders, and they need the data to really kind of align the ecosystem around a commonly understood set of employer problems. So that convener hat we've seen is is worn by some industry association. It could be worn by a utility because oftentimes they're thinking actually more broadly than a typical employer is about their region, but certainly kind of regional, kind of coalitions are important part of of that. And then there are certain kind of government agencies who are also getting that charge, such as such as Mass Mass EC. So the kind of the the intersection really is these fast moving industries and those kind of convener types, but they may wear kind of different, different hat, depending on the particular region, the protection of the industry in which we're which we're talking but that's, that's the common thread. Julian Alssid: And just Just a follow up to that. I mean, we've seen over the years, often data tools, you know, are purchased or used by organizations, and they kind of end up dying on the vine or shelves or whatever, the digital equivalent of that would be collecting dust somewhere. How do you ensure that that doesn't happen with your client, your clients and partners?  Matt Evans: It's a it's a great question. There is often, we've seen this the same the same thing, and so there's often a conversation that we continue to have with our partners on an ongoing basis and with the ecosystem of partners that they're bringing into it that needs to be had about how do we make sense of this data, and kind of, what do we do about it? I think what we've seen is the data provides not only kind of a roadmap of what's needed, but it's an accelerant of aligning the stakeholders around a common set of understood problems. So if we're trying to, say, engage employers effectively, or make sure we're reflective employers needs for a particular industry in a specific region. So it's we found it so much faster to have the data or workforce tools in which they're at the table, and we're talking about that, versus kind of people just staring at each other, kind of starting, starting from from scratch. So that really is a kind of a great kind of use case about how this really kind of plugs in. It plugs into people's kind of changing for driving workforce outcomes. Kaitlin LeMoine: Building upon that last point, Matt, you know, I mean, we, we always ask some version of the question I'm about to ask on this show, given that the show is workforces. But from your perspective, you know, what are some practical steps that our audience can take to become forces in using these types of tools effectively, on in their own initiatives, in their own work, especially in the case of fast moving industries, but maybe just in general. I mean, please take the question in whatever direction you'd like. Matt Evans: Really, it's, I think it starts with a question which is really centered around, does the existing data that I have give me the insights that I need to understand some of the questions that we've been talking about. Do I really understand the specific needs of employers with down to the role level? Do I really understand the skills that are attached to those roles? Do I really have a good understanding of what the future looks like for for forecasting or for for skills that often, I think, is the simplest, but are super powerful place to for folks to to start. And I think in some instance, the answer may be, Yep, I got what I need. For many of our partners, they're saying, well, actually, I don't I the data that I, that I looking for, does not exist. I really need these industry specific, specific solutions give me give one example in another industry, in biotech, one of our partners was kind of asking themselves the same question as they were trying to forecast the biotech workforce in their particular region. They've been using legacy data sets, including stuff at SOC Code or BLS level data. And it turns out, they were dramatically under because that is hiding in so many ways, or it doesn't even capture the full range of occupations that are needed in the industry. They were dramatically under forecasting, actually the workforce that they need in the region over the next, kind of seven to 10 to 10 years. So really, just starting with that simple question led them to kind of that insight. And I was maybe kind of a powerful place for anybody to start. Julian Alssid: Yeah, that is powerful. And it's good to know that we're moving forward with more granular, actionable data, because I think that so often we've been using, you know, a sledgehammer when we need a scalpel. Matt Evans: Yeah, we often, the analogy we often use is, you know, go from using glasses to actually using a microscope, so you really get the level of specificity that you need down to that job level, again, for roles which were not previously covered. Julian Alssid: Well, this has been really, really fascinating, Matt, and I'm sure will be of interest to many in our audience. And so how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work and Julius Education? Matt Evans: Well, obviously we'd love to connect with anyone on LinkedIn. Our website is another place to engage or for folks to reach out. Would certainly love to love to pick up any threads will be helpful. Our website is juliusedu.com we're also frequently at many of the conferences and workforce conferences that folks will be attending, I'm sure, who are listeners. So whether it's ASU, GSV, or Horizons, would look forward to the opportunity to say hello in person to folks. Too. Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. Well. Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today, Matt, we've learned a great deal from you, and look forward to continuing to follow and track your progress and exciting work ahead of you.  Matt Evans: Thanks so much for having me.  Julian Alssid: Thank you, Matt. Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please Subscribe, Like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.   

Naomi Boyer, Senior Vice President of Digital Transformation at Education Design Lab, discusses the importance of skills-based learning and how to align education with workforce needs. Boyer also discusses the need for trust and transparency in the talent marketplace, and a common language and framework for discussing skills and competencies. The episode also covers the importance of collaboration between education and industry. Boyer provides examples of successful partnerships and offers advice for building new models. The episode concludes with a discussion of the importance of empowering individuals to take control of their learning journey.  Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. One of the biggest challenges we face in aligning education to workforce needs is a disconnect between education and industry, especially when it comes to building new learning models.  Julian Alssid: So true Kaitlin and this gap became apparent as we began to shift to a knowledge based economy 30ish years ago, and addressing the gap is a big part of what attracted both of us to education and workforce development in the first place. But now it's taken center stage. Workers and students are frustrated and falling behind, and employers are way more interested in addressing the disconnect than ever before.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, there is now a much greater emphasis on skills from skills based hiring to skills based learning. And while identifying common skills across education providers and employers is a piece of the work, we also need to drive broader systems level change.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, and as we know from our own consulting work, this is no small task, and and our guest today is is working on bringing sense and clarity to systems level efforts. And you know, we're excited to welcome Naomi Boyer to the podcast today. Naomi Boyer: Thanks so much for having me excited to be here.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you so much for joining us, Naomi To give a bit of background on Naomi's years in this work, she's a driving force in transforming education for the future of work. As senior vice president of digital transformation at the Education Design Lab, she leads initiatives on digital micro credentials, skills based learning, and competency frameworks, ensuring learners are equipped for success in a rapidly evolving economy. With over two decades of experience in higher education, Naomi has a proven track record of innovation in areas including distance learning, faculty development and global initiatives. She is a recognized expert in competency based education and a passionate advocate for self directed learning, and we're very excited to have her with us on the podcast today. So thank you for being here. Julian Alssid: So Kaitlin, gave a little of your background, but would love to hear your own words about your background and your role at the Education Design Lab. Naomi Boyer: Thanks so much, Julian, I so first I don't have supreme clarity. If I did, we'd all be rich and have everything figured out in our society and everything else. But part of, part of why I'm in this work is because I have a passion for transforming education and learning and really helping facilitate differences for people in people's lives, right? And so that's an ongoing journey, and I don't think it's ever anything we're going to solve, but we can certainly make it easier and help people find their path as they go along. And so I actually started my journey in special education, and I think I use those skills every bit along the way here, even as I continue my my own journey through life. And so I went from teaching special education to becoming a mom, and then went back and worked on my doctorate in a really funky area at the time, distance learning. And actually my doctorate, my specialty was in systemic change, or organizational change and systemic leadership. And then wrote my dissertation though on building online learning communities and international environments. So this is back in 2001 so at the advent of of online learning, and it was at this point in my life that that I really began realizing that I can't always decide on going from point A to point B, you got to kind of follow the journey and the rolling the rolling hills as you go along, and it'll take you to some really cool and fun places. And so through that journey, I ended up at in higher ed, as you said, for over 17 years, both at the at a university, research one university, and at a community college and vice president positions that allowed me to do strategic innovations and change and contribute to all the cool stuff. I was chief information officers for five, five of the last years of that scope, and then jumped over to education Design Lab, which you will hear me affectionately call to to speak about is the Lab versus education Design Lab. I joined them over about six years ago, and came in and working on digital, micro credentials and a bunch of other things. I can tell you a little bit about the Lab, the position I'm in now at the Lab, I'm having the opportunity of really diving into three areas that are passionate for me. You've heard me say, education, transformation, the personalization of learning, I think, is key and really a disrupter, which some of what I heard in one of your last podcasts with Michael Horn. He was talking about some of those driving forces of personal, personalization of learning, and then the individual and empowerment in the learning process and how an individual can gain control over their own processes of learning in life, and this is not something that we necessarily cultivate in our K12 or even many of our higher ed classrooms. We cultivate compliant learners. And so people understanding and learning how to take control of their own learning process becomes absolutely instrumental. And so when I joined the Lab, I was able to bring all of those three things together. And basically, I get to run amok. I'd love to run them up and and contribute. And that's why I say we don't have it all figured out. So using human centered design is the methodology of the Lab, and get to deal with the many pervasive issues have created a fractured and limited talent development continuum, and how do we think about the things in between? And so the Lab has basically three streams of work to do this, one of which is college transformation, where we work directly with community colleges and help them think about new and innovative non degree credentials that they can introduce to be responsive to the local workforce and learners. You know, we do some deep work and understanding who the new majority learner is, and we use the word new majority, majority to refer to all of those learners that higher ed was not was those who fall out of the scope of who Higher Ed was originally designed for, right? Like the 18 to 22 year old that was going to is going to go full time to university. So the new majority are those. They don't fit into that mold. And then the area that I cover, which is digital transformation, which sounds like it's all about technology, but it's about leveraging the technology for that human experience. So how do we really think about human change, access and opportunity, right? And really think about it for those who in order to improve social mobility, economic vitality, for those who need it the most, Kaitlin LeMoine: As you mentioned the last, the last focus of your work, the digital transformation piece, I appreciate your call out of like, it's not just about the technology, but can you tell us a little bit more about when you say, yes, our work is around digital transformation, what that means and what, what the problems are that you're looking to address through, through that element of your work. Naomi Boyer: There's no doubt that technology needs to be a component of thinking about scalable, accessible, innovative options for facilitating. I can go back to the beginning, where I said personalization, of learning and really rethinking the way we do things. In our current talent market, there's a disconnect between the way we have, we may be using the technology tools to apply for a job, but we're not necessarily capitalizing on those tools so that Naomi can say what I know and can do, so that my skills are captured in such a way that they become transparent. So, you know, at the Lab, we deal with a number of problems, I'll say, or issues, challenges that are in that talent continuum. And I like to say we deal with wicked issues, big, hairy issues, right? Like portability, transfer, ability, flexibility, and my work with digital transformation is really around the visibility. So how do we make each individual skills visible, not only just for everyone else, but for themselves. What are the skills that I have? How do I then document those skills? How do I see the skills I need along a career trajectory, and then how do I make those skills visible in the marketplace for others to find me, and for me to find those a match up with, with the skills that I have, right? And so whether that's through digital micro credentialing, whether that's through what we call learning and employment records, whether it's through the validation and trusting of establishing trust and what someone knows and can do, there's all of these issues around visibility, and that's how we're using the technology to allow an individual to flow through their process and fund it. But it's not about necessarily programming and technology, just about the technology.  Julian Alssid: Yes, indeed. I mean, that's, yeah, that's That's great. It's all the stuff we love. Kaitlin, I mean, come on. So I'd love to hear a little bit about projects that you're most excited about currently, where, you know, where you're employing, you know, this personalization in the digital strategies. You know you'd mentioned Texas and Arizona when we talked. Earlier, but about some projects you're most excited about. Naomi Boyer: And some of the projects that that I'm going to describe right now deal also with some of those big, hairy issues I mentioned, right like so. So one of the things that we're, I'm hearing a lot from employers, is is, is trust, not necessarily trust in the way you may hear some of our colleagues who are more technically focused, talk about which is the verification of credentials, but more about the trust whether this credential represents the true skills someone has, and that's the skill validation piece of things. And I've heard from employers that it's a crowded, crowded marketplace out there right now, as far as what the credentials mean and what it looks like and how they can consume them. I've heard from my colleagues at the SHRM Foundation that that it, you know, they spend somewhere between four to six seconds HR leader sends to spend somewhere between four to six seconds on resumes and as part of that hiring process. So how can I make sense of all of these credentials and information that's coming in in this new skills based marketplace. And so that's one piece of it, the other one, and one of those problems, is that that the skills continuum from learning the skills documentation of those skills, transfer those skills, and then using those skills for each to communicate something, whether that's into a higher ed degree, into another higher ed learning experience, or into some sort of employment, those systems are broken because you have your education systems working and trying to get in play in this marketplace, you have your workforce support organizations that are are talking about skills and doing their skills, and you have your employers who are doing the same thing, and most folks are in their own silos, in their own organizational sectors, trying to figure this stuff out, but the systems are not being connected together. How do we think about connecting those systems? In fact, I have a colleague from Colorado who's involved in a project called the skills forward, work that's being doing, being done nationally. And she described the Colorado project, what's something they didn't know going into the project was and of course, she was using a metaphor, very Colorado issue of trees. And she says each organization as a group of trees. But what didn't exist were the roots in between to connect those systems, right? And so the projects I'm going to tell you, I'm going to talk to you about, are all about, how do we connect these systems, establish more trust and really allow these the conversations to happen around regions and industries, to leverage the economic change that we're trying to create. So the first one I'll talk a little bit about is in Texas right now. And in fact, they I just heard that there was new legislation that was being introduced to increase their crypto currency abilities. And you know, the Bitcoin developing Bitcoin resources. But right now, the area of Western Northern Texas, I'll say, from Dallas to Odessa is burgeoning forth with data processing centers, both traditional data processing centers and those that are more say on the crypto, Blockchain side of things. And there's a difference in those lines of industries. There's the same industry, but two tracks, because of the type of individuals that could be attracted, as far as talent that comes in the door to really work in those spaces. Right now, we're working on a project that is multifaceted. We started with the employers, did a number of salons, and heard and learned from the employers in this industry, what they needed, what their their deficits were, what was important. And then from there, we've been designing a project that will kick off in June and February with a convening, and we will have employers at the table. We will have education entities and alternative education entities, K 12, technical schools, universities, colleges at the table. We will have workforce and community based organizations at the table. And the idea is to create, is to get people, stakeholders, all in the room, having conversation and dialog, to create a flywheel around an industry and create a blueprint, trying to establish replicable blueprints that can create a connected talent ecosystem, which then attracts the industry, which is already coming to the region, because they already have like SpaceX coming to the region, and Google coming to the region, and Amazon coming to the region for these data centers. But if you want to have a successful industry movement like that, you've got to have the talent and so and because we, I know from my economic development partners that talent is one of the biggest things that you will they that is used in that space to attract i. A major industry to a region, and so we will be working over the next year and a half to create that dynamic ecosystem that can supply talent for the businesses that need it, that it will be an employer focused, business driven approach, and we will work with our education partners to help meet that pipeline, and hopefully, by the end of this entire project, we will also have those technological systems in place to make sure all of the entities are connected together and able to share the information and that skills visibility comes to the forefront. The Arizona work is all about doing for education, some of the ecosystem. Work you heard me describing in Texas, all of the higher ed entities, community colleges and universities in Arizona, are at the table having conversations about how they build their connected infrastructure so that they can minimize transition points for learners, high school into university, high school, into college, into the workforce, all these different back to college, back to university. And right now they're figuring out how they can consume credentials, much like we're trying to get employers to consume credentials in that space. They're the only that's the only project I know of that's really focused on the education side of things.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, I find it so interesting what you just said a moment ago. I mean, everything you just said was very interesting. But one thing that sticks out to me in what, and what you just raised Naomi, is this concept of employers need to see talent in the space in order to be attracted to the region, and yet, learners need to know that there are jobs available for them to go into, right? And so it's like, it's kind of, like this chicken or egg phenomenon of, like, where do you start, right? And I feel like that's that's such a big challenge in this work is figuring out how to, as you're saying, build that flywheel, but you have to ground it in some kind of a starting point, right? Like, so curious. I mean, if you have any thoughts or insights there around, like, how do you start, right? What do you need to show first in order to, like, get this work going well. Naomi Boyer: And there's actually a third element there that's even adding another wheel going in, that hamster there, which is, which is all, is all about the emergent fields, right? So there's a number of emergent industries. Historically, we've always worked from targeted occupation lists. Where's the gap, where's the need, what do we need to fill? Right? And when you're talking about emergent industries, whether that's AI like this, data processing, sustainable energy, right? We can go into automation, robotics, we can talk about all that, but they're emerging industries, and as a result, you don't necessarily have the workforce data to support that those jobs are needed, which is coming first? And how do you think about this in this particular case? How did it start? And I would say that this has probably got to be it's a huge element and insight for myself and learning this past year champion, there's a local champion who is driving the effort and basically saying, and he's, he's talking to people. He's attracting, attracting businesses. And he is a very successful businessman. He He's the, he owns Cholla Energy and Cholla Petroleum, and he's been called out in the in the literature, is the crypto cowboy, but, but he is that voice in the region that has really started the movement to get the traction, to get like, where do you start? It was with him. He's the power and the voice behind it, and then, as a result, that's created other levers to make things happen, and then there is local market data that can support that. There was already a number of data processing organizations that were beginning to work there. Julian Alssid: As you're speaking now. I mean, it's making me think, Kaitlin, of some of our work as well. I mean, a project we've been doing in my home state where I'm sitting right now, Rhode Island, with this helping to build a plan for workforce development in the life sciences industry. It's, yes, it's that chicken or egg issue with respect to economic development, but it's also like, you also don't want to train people for jobs that don't exist yet. So it's also trying to figure out, like, Well, what do we do currently, that we do well, that we can build on, that can then become the basis for the attraction and training people for future jobs. It's a real it's a very delicate dance. Naomi Boyer: You're exactly right, Julian, because it is. Because even as we're talking about data processing now, data processing isn't new, right? We've had since cloud computing emerged on the market, you've started seeing more decentralized data processing centers that were that, have you know, came into the market as part of that work. And there was an article I read that said, for every data processing center, you need 800 electricians. So we're not just talking it. And cybersecurity and data networking folks that know how to do it. We're also talking plumbing and HVAC and electricians and all of these. So to your point, Julian, there's already there are talent pieces there of that puzzle that are already in existence that you can leverage and thinking about that and leverage the existing market, even while you build those burgeoning industries that are that are coming forward. And because it takes time, it takes time to get all of those things going. So Julian, your point's well taken. Kaitlin LeMoine: Naomi, you talked about the salons that you held in Texas to drive this work forward across a range of stakeholder groups. And really, it sounds, you know, with the goal of breaking down these silos that we all talk about right are maybe front and center more than ever before, because we're trying to do more and more of this. You know, very needed cross functional and cross stakeholder work. What are the biggest challenges you face as you work across these different groups to build new models and new systems and and where do you see the emerging opportunities. Naomi Boyer: What's fascinating to me is my education colleagues. Just about every college and university has an advisory board, right? And they bring their they bring employers in, they ask them to sit on an advisory board. And I this is, I'm going to make a broad generalization here that is not accurate for everyone, but say a lot of them are, sit and listen to what we've been doing, and please nod your head at what we've what you know. And yeah, give us a few comments here and there about what we need to do, but it's not meaningful deep work. And when they ask the employers to come, and they don't always come and sustain over time, our my education colleagues get frustrated with the fact that, hey, we invite them and they don't come right? And so my point has always been, why are we expecting them to come to us? Why aren't we going into them? Why aren't we meeting them where they're at right? Like, why aren't we going to where employers are having your HR conferences, you're where they're having skills conversations, where they're doing all of these things. Because I've been in a number of meetings where I've heard people say, Yeah, but the employers, they're just not there. They're just not ready. They're not doing these things. Well, my conversation suggests, oh yeah, they're doing they're doing this. They're having the skills dance, but they're having the same skills dance that the educators are having within the organization. They're trying to get their own closets in order. They're trying to make their own skills taxonomies set situated, and what's been most important for them is not skills based hiring, but skills for optimization of their own organizations. Because the ROI has really been around the optimization in their own organizations, just like on the educator side, our higher ed institutions are awarding credentials because that's where their ROI is. They're not accept, necessarily accepting credentials on the way in the door through digital, you know, digital credentials and their digital micro credentials, or other forms of digital skills in the door either they're not hiring based off of skills, but it's really easy to say, Oh, they're just not interested in playing, right? And so helping break that down and really think about what that looks like, we actually, at the lab, we designed a new activity last year that we call the skill simulation. And if anyone's participated in a poverty simulation before, it's very much like that. Everyone has a persona that they're asked to assume as part of the exercise, everything from an employer a learner, an education entity or community based organization, and the goal is to have our opportunity seekers end up in jobs, and through the journey, they quickly realize with these different personas, where all those challenges exist in our current systems, and how fractured it is as they go through that process. So sometimes it's just a matter of helping people walk a mile in the shoes of the other entities to really understand what we're dealing with here, and as we keep talking about skills and skills based practices, it's so much bigger than skills, because we're really talking about competencies, even though skills has become the more mainstream vernacular. Julian Alssid: Yeah, it's no, it's so true. It's fun. I'm kind of smiling and nodding. For those of you listening to audio who can't see us, it's just so fun to have this conversation with someone who's kind of in the in the playing in the same sandbox, because it's just so interesting to hear your take on it and and I think you just offered some really good advice. Part of what we do here with Work Forces is, you know, so the whole idea is, we're helping these education and workforce leaders navigate this very complicated intersection of work and learning. Can you, can you offer so they can become forces just like you? Some more, some more, very specific, practical steps that folks can take in developing innovative and responsive, you know, programs to meet current and future needs. Naomi Boyer: So one of the things I mentioned. Early on is that we use human centered design at the lab and for coming up with new models to make all this work. So please don't think in anything. I'm saying that it is a here's how you fix it. This is how it should work, kind of thing. Because really it depends on the stakeholder, meaning education. The advantage to the education entity, the advantage tothe employer. Like when we're saying, what are the tangible steps? I think it looks different for each of those entities and even for the opportunity seeker, because the thing I love about this environment is that person who's seeking opportunities can be empowered now in so many ways that they otherwise couldn't have been previously people have once they're given full advantage of the skills that they own. You, you might be thinking yourself, oh, I always knew my skills. I always could do these things. Well, you may have known your skills, but how do you communicate those in a way that can be consumed by others, right, in a different way. And so we're at an intersection, I think, where, where we're at an inflection point, where I can see true systemic change happening. So a few things, a few things that I would say, one, if you're on the education side, really get in and listen. I mentioned employer salons, those are really informal setting sessions we have with employers in an informal environment to have a conversation about what their need is. We listen. We do not say we've got your answer. We listen and we take down notes, and from there, we then can come back and say, Okay, so now let's design together. Let's think about things together. So understanding would be the first step through all of that. The second piece is, as we ideate to what the, what the possible model is, is to, is to do it together. So if I'm an employer who's really looking for for some support, like, I really need someone to take to help me fill this particular training pathway, let's say, make the call to the local community college, make the call to the university, somehow, get that that partner and sit down and really talk with them about what the need is, and understand, if you're an employer, where I start to see, and this is, you know, just tangible steps where I start to start to see the barriers break down are in those industries that have become at a crisis, and employers are working together within An industry. So for instance, rather than it being just my company trying to fill my job roles, I'll use healthcare as an example. I have other projects in healthcare. It's become such a crisis that the healthcare entities previously in competition with each other, they know they're just stealing the talent from one to another, giving bonuses. You know, I'll give you a $10,000 signing bonus, and you jump from one hospital and come over to me, they're not fixing their talent pipeline, because all they're doing is trading it back and forth. And once they come to the table together and talk across their industry, they're then able to think about more innovative solutions together that then potentially can open up that pipeline in a way that then is going to bring all of them more success, rather than that competitive nature. So I'm not giving you step one, step two, step three, because I think the stakeholder group is is different, and those steps look different for for those individuals. You know, as far as what that looks like, the opportunity seeker is now completely empowered to take your resume and a job description and put it through open AI, and as they do that, they're going to come out with a job with a resume that looks right along the lines of what that employer was asking for. Now I'm giving away a big secret, because now those employers are going to get resumes that all look alike, another big, hairy problem now where we're going to have to figure out how to really start thinking about matching up those skills for optimal benefit for everybody involved, Kaitlin LeMoine: As you mentioned earlier, Naomi, that really does right in some way. All circle back to competencies, both in under a way to communicate on the learner side and a way to validate on the employers to go, to go way beyond what you know. ChatGPT will do to ensure that you know, you're really able to confirm what people know and can do. We've got to get down to trust. Julian Alssid: So yeah. It also circles back to the personalization notion, like, ultimately, you know, and this is coming up in a bunch of conversations around AI is like, you know, like, how do we even you know if students are going to be, for example, if students are using AI, how do we know what the student knows? Ultimately comes down to, similarly, on the job, what can that person do? How are they going to represent and even though the resume look may look like everyone else is, how are they going to distinguish themselves and describe what they do and show clarity of. The context in which they're carrying their skills to the next weigh station.  Naomi Boyer: Absolutely, and start part of that skills visibility. This is a personal belief, and it was something that I actually came to when I came to the lab, that that was part of their their conversation, which is explicitness and intentionality. So so part of the learning process, and this is back on the education side, things to do is, is really think about how we're making the skills and competencies that we're embedding into our learning process intentional for the learner, they need to understand exactly what they're learning when they're learning it, and explicitness so that they can then walk into a job interview. Let's say somebody is we've said, we've we've empowered somebody with critical thinking, right? Like, how many of our general, general education classes talk about, you know, doing embedding critical thinking? Well, okay, so I put on my resume, I can do critical thinking, and then I walk in or ChatGPT tells me to put on my resume critical thinking. And then I, I walk into, you know, I get, I get through the gate, and I come into this interview, and I get asked, okay, so give me an example of when you just display critical thinking and what, what was included in that, if I can't explicitly say, what were the competencies and how did I demonstrate those? It's pretty clear that I don't maybe I don't have those skills, but I could have those skills, I just don't know how to talk about it. So that explicitness, the transparency, the intentionality, becomes really important on those steps right to success of being able to do that. And I would say that that's a big part of this whole skills movement Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely, and that's a skill in and of itself, right? I mean, just to communicate, oh yeah, those skills and building that skill for a learner as well. Really appreciate the steps you've provided. And we totally recognize that these are not like, you can't necessarily, necessarily say, first you do this and then you do that, but at, you know, taking that, the concept of understanding and then ideating, we think those are some really grounded recommendations as we as we seek to drive the future of this, of this type of work. Naomi, as we wind down our conversation today, and it's really been such a privilege to connect with you. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Well, Naomi Boyer: Well, really excited to to connect with anybody who's interested after this podcast, but my email address is n, b, o, y, e, r at all one word, eddesignlab.org. Our website is eddesignlab.org and we have an innovator network that you can sign up for and get get ongoing newsletters that come out as part of the work to stay abreast of what the Lab is doing. Julian Alssid: Thank you so much Naomi for taking the time to speak with us. And I know we didn't give the none of us have yet given the conclusive perfect answer to it all. But as you say, it's, it's all a process, and it's all about adaptation and customization and learning along the way. So hopefully that's what everyone is hearing. Naomi Boyer: Yes, all fun to run amok, and we didn't even, we didn't even get all the way through the design process right, which we would have moved into prototyping and and launching all the things that as you go through that process of CO designing with with your partners. Julian Alssid: Yes, well, we'll have to have you back for a chapter two.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Part two, yeah, part two. Thank you so much for your time.  Naomi Boyer: Thank you.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to workforces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We are also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please Subscribe, Like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Brandon Busteed, CEO of BrandEd, joins Work Forces to discuss the power of industry immersion in education. He shares his background as an edtech entrepreneur and executive at Kaplan and Gallup, and his journey to BrandEd, a company that partners with global brands like Sotheby's and The New York Times to offer experiential education programs built and taught jointly by industry leaders and academics. The conversation also explores the importance of hands-on learning and how better align educational experiences with the world of work. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Welcome back. We're excited to be kicking off season four of Work Forces.  Julian Alssid: As we kick off this new season, we're looking forward to diving into topics that resonate with you, our listeners, and connect with our consulting work as well.  Kaitlin LeMoine: One topic that's top of mind for us is how to most effectively prepare learners for the jobs and careers they enter upon graduation. We're seeing more of an emphasis on models that bridge education and work, from work based learning to apprenticeships and internships.  Julian Alssid: With increasing skill demand, we know that students need more experience when they graduate, whether from high school or post secondary programs. And in our work, we're involved with initiatives that are tackling this issue from different levels, from community colleges to statewide consortia.  Kaitlin LeMoine: We're looking forward to our discussion with today's guests to explore how corporations can act as a driver of high quality industry aligned education. Brandon Busteed is the CEO of BrandEd, a family owned education company that partners with global brands like Sotheby's and the New York Times to offer experiential learning courses. He's a passionate advocate for work integrated learning, and believes the future of education will seamlessly blend learning and work environments. With a background as an ed tech entrepreneur and executive at Kaplan and Gallup, Brandon brings a wealth of experience to his current role. He's a recognized thought leader in education and workforce development, having founded a successful ed tech company and authored numerous articles and publications, Brandon is also a sought after speaker and serves on the boards of several organizations dedicated to improving education and workforce outcomes. We're thrilled to have him join us today for a deep dive into the exciting intersection of learning and work. So welcome to the Work Forces podcast, Brandon.  Brandon Busteed: Yeah, thanks that to me is the most exciting intersection to be in the middle of, and I know you guys in your podcast have sat at that intersection as well, so I'm glad that we had an opportunity to meet up virtually here. Thanks for having me.  Julian Alssid: Well, yeah, it is great to have you Brandon. And yes, we often use the that analogy of the intersection and what a messy intersection it is, but for people like you who help help us all trying to make sense of this crazy intersection. So yes, welcome. Kaitlin gave a little bit of your background, but we'd love to hear in your own words -- about your background and your current role at BrandEd.  Brandon Busteed: Yeah. So you know, as you guys noted, I started down this education path literally right out of college as an undergrad. If you had asked me my senior year in college whether I was going to be in the education space, I would have probably told you no, really wasn't on the radar. And then, you know, I started a company. I started an education company that was focused on addressing a really important issue of college binge drinking, which at the time was, you know, at the top of the list of concerns among college leaders. And so that was, you know, kind of my first run as a founder and CEO of outside the classroom and in a very specific space, trying to address dangerous drinking and other drinking related behaviors on campus. And you know, when the organization was acquired, I had an opportunity to go help Gallup build an education and workforce development division. And that really in terms of, you know, where, where I am at. BrandEd is a bit of my origin story to why BrandEd. Because you guys may recall that during that time, Gallup issued this massive study on the outcome of college graduates. It was, you know, under the heading of the Gallup-Purdue Index, and to this day, still the largest representative study that's ever been done, looking at college graduates and their outcomes in work and in well being and other dimensions. And what was so important about that study was that work-integrated learning opportunities, if a student had one during college, doubled their odds of being successful later in life, not just from a workplace engagement perspective, but in their overall well being. And so if you think about the secret ingredients of education or the secret ingredients of college, one of the big aspects is work integrated learning. And Kaitlin, as you were doing the introduction, there's a lot of different derivatives of what we would call work integrated learning, but specifically it was things like whether a student had an internship where they were able to apply what they were learning in the classroom, that connectivity was really important, long term projects that took a semester or more to complete, again, mimicking more of a real world work environment. And so I pause on that part of my Gallup experience, because as I left and went to Kaplan and was able to work in a global role at Kaplan, specific to education, I was spending a lot of time looking at the learning and work intersection that included work that we did with Amazon and their Career Choice Program for upskilling their frontline workers, and even, you know, innovative options for high school students in enabling them to have a better understanding of jobs and careers, so that they could better understand what they should major in during college, right? So, so all that led to why BrandEd you know, I've been at BrandEd for just under a year now, and in simple terms, I looked at what they were doing and to me, and I won't take any credit for it, because I said this prior to my arrival, but there's no doubt that BrandEd is doing the world's best industry immersive education. And what do I mean by that? Right? We work with iconic brands, as you mentioned, organizations like the New York Times or Sotheby's or Manchester City, and we develop just incredibly engaging and exciting educational programs that are co taught by industry experts and educational experts that give students real, hands on experiences and applications. It gives them behind the scenes access to these organizations in the industry and access, not just to one but many experts from those industries to understand the incredible diversity of jobs that one could have in the art industry or the fashion industry or the sport business industry. And so I was excited to be part of that, and have, you know, been thrilled to be coming up on almost a year here so far.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So can you tell us a little bit about the history of BrandEd? How did it start? And, you know, kind of, what was the, what was the impetus for, for the organization?  Brandon Busteed: Yeah, I've had a few friends joke thinking that I must have started my own company because, you know, I called it BrandEd. It's just a coincidence that it happens to be, you know, very closely aligned my name, because BrandEd has been around for a good 20 plus years, Kaitlin, and it started with, interestingly enough, the acquisition of Sotheby's Institute of Art out of Sotheby's the Auction House. So Sotheby's had started Sotheby's Institute of Art, some 55 years ago as an educational institution that would train the future leaders of the art industry. And although, from the beginning, they certainly had the idea that it would help train future leaders at Sotheby's, they were very innovative in their thinking, in that they also knew it would be the kind of place that would contribute to talent and leaders in the industry writ large. And, you know, that's a consistent theme that I've seen in all of the brand partners we work with, you know, the New York Times. We run the school of New York Times that's a pre college program for high school students. But they very much see their their role as contributing to, you know, students going into the field of journalism having a better understanding of what the different roles are within that industry. And not just for the New York Times, but for the entire industry, if you will, media and journalism. Same thing can be said for the work we do with Manchester City and with Vogue and so anyway, the starting point was that acquisition, interestingly enough, of an educational institution being run inside of a company, realizing that education wasn't their wheelhouse, it wasn't their core focus, but that it had an important role in the world, and looking to an organization like BrandEd to run it in a, you know, highly professional academic way where there was a lot of alignment to educational outcomes. Similarly, the organization acquired what was then called Conde Nast College of Fashion out of Conde Nast, it was recently rebranded Vogue College of Fashion, so that's what it is now. And then we partnered with, I'd say, an organic partnership with both the New York Times and Manchester City in developing the programs there. So it's a really interesting example of a couple that were educational institutions started inside of companies that were very forward thinking and how they viewed talent development and talent development, not just for their organization, but for the industry in general, and then others who just saw the value of, you know, partnering to do this. Because I would say, if you ask me, what some of the secret sauce of our BrandEd programs is, it's a really simple example, but it's a powerful one, and it's co teaching. You know, we, we always have examples where a school invites somebody in to give a guest lecture. That's great. It's usually a one time thing. There's not a lot of prep. That person might be really great, engaging or not so much. You know, all the programs we do, they're co designed, curated, developed and taught by the industry experts and educational experts, which you would think of as teachers or faculty. I don't think that's unique to BrandEd, I think we do it in a world class way, but that's an example, I think, of where other educational organizations can make big strides in scaling this industry immersive opportunity. It's not rocket science, you know, but that co teaching is actually just a really rare example right now.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, it's so interesting. Brandon hearing you, kind of talk about the history of the companies being so kind of at the forefront, and this notion of this immersive approach. But I also think back to the study you referenced when you were a Gallup that produced that big study. And it does seem like, and I don't know if this is chicken or an egg or whatever, but that study was big, and it, you know, it would highlight this issue about the work based learning component being so impactful, it seems that this has become way more of a storyline in workforce development than it was back then. And I'm curious from where you're sitting now, and since you did that study, like, why? What's going on? In your opinion, that's made this more front and center than ever before.  Brandon Busteed: Yeah, look, I think the biggest driver is just when, when the price tag of education goes up, and especially higher education, and when the number one reason why people value higher education is to get a good or better job there starts to become a more rigorous return on investment calculation being done by prospective students and their families as they evaluate it, right? And, you know, if you say, hey, the number one reason why I value this degree or I'm going to pursue it is to get a good or better job, and you don't feel like that's happening, or that you're being, you know, really sufficiently prepared for that next step. Well, that, I think, is one of the big, big drivers, right? Cost has been going up. Doubts about the work, readiness of graduates has been going up as well. And so you've got a perfect storm of, I don't believe we're doing a good job of this work, you know, preparation or career readiness thing, and it's getting more and more expensive. And, oh, by the way, there's a lot of other interesting alternatives, right? And so it's been the backdrop of that. But, yeah, look, I think that study made a meaningful contribution to the thinking of the higher ed community around Wow, this is a valuable component. We do it, but we don't do it at scale like that was the big finding Julian from my study. About a third of college graduates had a job or internship where they were able to apply what they were learning in the classroom. So it's not zero, but two thirds are missing the mark. And you know, there's fresh data just this year from the Business-Higher Ed Forum that kind of speaks to this. There were 8.2 million college students who wanted an internship last year. Only 3.6 million got one, and of those, only 2.5 million had what they called a quality experience in that internship, right? Because we all know there's internships that are really great and some that are total duds. Well, what I take from that data? First, I'm a huge fan of internships. There aren't many people that are a bigger fan of internships than me, but you also realize they don't scale. So there's no data to suggest that the number of internships in the United States has increased over the last 30 or 40 years. Clearly, demand for it is sky high. And so you say, Okay, if you can get an internship grade. But short of that, what are the other ways that we can bring this valuable experience to more students at greater scale, and that's obviously why, you know, I'm so excited about the work that we're doing at BrandEd. I think we're going to make a meaningful contribution to that.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So as you're talking about your learners, Brandon, who are your learners, and how do you reach them?  Brandon Busteed: We work across the board, Kaitlin with each of our brand partners. We have pre college programs for high school students, primarily 10th, 11th and 12th graders. So that's clearly a big demographic that we serve, is current high school students who are looking to augment their high school academic experience with, you know, something that is really industry immersive. And we also serve undergraduate college students with opportunities to study away or study abroad, where, instead of the traditional study abroad experience, they're doing an industry immersive program with one of our brands, and then with Vogue and Sotheby specifically, we do operate master's degree programs within both of those organizations. So at Sotheby's, you know, we're known probably most prominently for our masters in our business, you would expect an organization like Sotheby's Institute of Art to probably have a degree like that. So, you know, within those two brands, we're serving Master's Degree students, but in terms of the largest volume of students that we're serving by number, it's clearly pre college students and undergraduates who are looking to add a valuable industry immersive experience to their otherwise academic portfolio.  Julian Alssid: So Brandon, as you build out these immersive experiences with these global brands, what are the major successes and challenges you faced?  Brandon Busteed: Yeah, look, I mean, you know, part of it is what we've invested a lot of time and energy and years as an organization and refining the, you know, the aspects of, how do you take the best of what you can learn in a work environment with the best of what academics do in terms of curating something that you know looks like an academic, you know, syllabus or schedule that has building sequential pieces to it, reflective components. You know, think about in the workplace. You know, how little we take time to reflect or digest a project, or be like, Hey, how did that go? You know, cutting edge organizations do a good job with debriefing and certain things like that. But anyway, to your good question, a lot of it has been refining the blending of these two worlds, right? And, you know, you've, you've all heard it. You know, a lot of academics who are trained in educational pedagogy have rarely had experiences outside of academia. And you know, they went, they went to graduate school for education, you know, they have a master's degree, but you know, relatively little work experience outside of being a student and outside of working in an academic environment. And then with a lot of the subject matter experts we work with, who have real jobs and real organizations, right? They haven't been trained in educational pedagogy. They haven't thought about, well, how do I make this engaging for a high school student? And so it's really been the efforts that we've invested in training both our educational experts or faculty and our industry experts, and then getting them to work together. Because, like I said, it's not Hey, invite a guest lecture in, and they do their talk and leave like, these are things that are co designed, curated together, developed together. And so that's our biggest challenge and opportunity. We've honed in on that craft. Doing that requires real effort. You know, I can't launch a brand new program without having some pretty good lead up time in terms of the work involved in producing it, whether that's an in person or an online program. And then the other thing where, you know, we bring this to life for students, it has some natural limitation, is access to behind the scenes things right? Students who come into a Sotheby's program are visiting the Auction House. They're, you know, they're getting a behind the scenes look at the organization in ways that you know you just, you just can't replicate otherwise. So I think our our biggest opportunities, like everything else, are indeed scale, but we've developed a model that has a lot more scale than an internship model or a co op model, so, but fundamentally, there are still those limitations like I've provided.  Julian Alssid: So Kaitlin asked you, we tend to think of this as a dual customer kind of business, right? Your learners, your employers, who are the faculty? Brandon Busteed: So it's any number of folks in various roles within both our partner organizations and folks within the broader like sport industry, for example. So you take the school, The New York Times, probably about half of the faculty in The New York Times are indeed staff members or former staff members from The New York Times. The other half are a combination of folks that have had journalism backgrounds for other organizations, right? Et cetera. So it's a mix of both staff from the organizations we partnered with, and then staff from the industry. But again, underneath that layer, Julian, it's an industry expert, and what we would think of as a teaching or educational expert. So we have general education faculty who are partnering with the subject matter experts to help create the syllabus, right? Put some structure around it. Think about not just the assignments and projects that students would do, which largely come from the industry expert input, but thinking about, okay, how do we roll this out with a student group? How do we create a rubric for giving them feedback or grading these projects, right? And so it's those two types of backgrounds working together that definitely make every one of our programs come to life. But it's, you know, it's been interesting because as I watch and sit in some of our classes, I see joy in the students that are in the classes, right? Where they're clearly getting exposed to things that they don't in school. You know, one of those common refrains I get from students is like, wow, this felt nothing like school. This is totally different, right? I mean, just it feels different to them. But I also see joy on the faces of the faculty that are teaching these programs. And again, faculty meaning, two meanings, the educational that, you know, trained experts, and then the industry experts who are spending time away from their jobs to, you know, come and provide these educational experiences for students and and for them, it's very much about getting excited about the future generation of folks who may be interested in this field, find them, embrace them, and more of a mentorship, you know, support type fashion, which is really awesome to see.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, I'm really, I'm really stuck on what you just said a moment ago. Brandon about how learners will say, This doesn't feel like school. It's curious to me, right? Like what I want? I mean, this is a general wondering, but it's almost like I wonder what that means for how we offer secondary ed, right? Or higher ed. I mean, if you're saying you're drawing from secondary learn, secondary school learners, as well as learners already enrolled in undergraduate programs, what are the implications for even how those learners go back to those environments?  Brandon Busteed: You know, here's the good news. There's awesome examples out there, right? They haven't been brought to scale. So you think about the high schools that have invested heavily in project based learning, that's a big component what we're doing, right? I mean, their students are engaged in real projects. They're given feedback on those projects. They have to then go back to the drawing board and iterate a bit, right? So that iterative feedback process in the midst of a real project or deliverable is a big part of what we do in our BrandEd programs, but you can do that with just a little bit of imagination in any academic program out there. I've seen it done in intro to Spanish to philosophy, right, where project based learning and iterative feedback and small group work is part of it. Those things mimic much more of what a real world work environment is like, so short of having a job where you do that, or short of having an internship where you do that, I think we can do these kinds of things at greater scale. We've seen schools do this at greater scale. So it gives me a lot of hope that with a little bit of familiarity, a little bit of support, a little bit of teacher encouragement, we can indeed get to a place where a lot more of this happens, where the students do say, like, oh my gosh, I got to do something real. I met a real life so and so, you know, person in job that you, you know, invent, envision you might want to be in someday. And then, you know, like, the other refrain we get a lot from students is they're like, I had no idea that there were so many different kinds of jobs in this industry, right? So you think fashion, you're like, oh, fashion design, right? Well, but the reality is, there are, you know, hundreds of different kinds of jobs that exist in the fashion industry, including you could be an accountant working for a fashion organization. So that might not mean that you are the fashion design guru, but you are in the fashion industry, in a job, like an accounting role, and so I think that's the other thing, is we're opening, we're hoping to open the aperture of thinking to the art of possible, not just, oh, the fashion industry, but all the different components of it. Think about a hospital, right? There's everything from, you know, the nurse to the doctor, those are the classic roles everybody thinks of very simplistically, right? Then you think about the lab techs and the radiology texts. And, I mean, you know, all of a sudden you can take a single hospital and realize there are dozens of different jobs beyond doctor and nurse, right? And so that's a lot of what we need to help younger people do. And I would argue, maybe even older people figure out if there's a lot of college graduates leaving, you know, their undergrad program or their master's program, still not really fully understanding the breadth of jobs that exist in the world.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, 100% I mean, I think we, and Julian, I've been talking a lot about that point recently, just around the transparency of roles and feel like, you know, it's not, we're not. We're no longer in the days of like, you know, doctor, lawyer, teacher, right? Like, there are so many jobs and so many jobs that cross sectors and what those you know, there's some common skills that you draw upon throughout those different jobs, but there's some distinct knowledge and skill sets you need as well. And just being transparent about that, I feel like, is such a critical piece of this puzzle. And I, you know, I think what you mentioned about the project based learning piece, right? I mean, like that is something that is certainly transferable. And, you know, spent years designing those, those types of programs and curriculum myself and there, there certainly is that transferability, but it does require different type of intentionality and just a slight shift in thinking that, you know, it's exciting to think about, you know, more and more as we think future state. How can, as you're saying, How can we integrate work based learning more kind of across education? There are, I think, because I'm really excited to do that. Brandon Busteed: We lose track of this. Like I use the words fun and exciting and engaging when I think about or describe BrandEd programs. So it's not just that. It's industry immersive, and it has this very purposeful connection to work readiness and career readiness. It's that, like, you're in these programs, and you're you're having fun, you're excited and like, I just feel like we have lost sight of the fun and excitement and engaging factor of school and education. Like, if we can't figure out how to get back to that where students are like, that was awesome, wWe've got another thing coming, right?  Julian Alssid: Well, it's funny too, like we're doing work now around manufacturing and advanced manufacturing, and a big project in Massachusetts, for example, some work in Life Sciences. There's some really cool jobs out there that people know nothing about, right? Which is just amazing. So you know, of course, yes, I would like to work for Man City, but that's a different conversation. So bringing us back to to your namesake BrandEd, how will BrandEd continue to grow? Brandon Busteed: The programs we have with current partners? There's, in my mind, plenty of growth ahead, just in building, you know, those programs as they exist. We're also launching, you know, new versions what we're doing, right? So last several years, we've done exclusively in person summer pre college programs for high school students. Just this week, we're going to be launching the first online pre college offering. So for students that can't take, you know, a two week block in the summer. Can't afford an in person, you know, intensive summer program. You know, we will have fully online offerings available that also won't require students necessarily to have to do it just in the summer. So, you know, expanding by modality and some of the differences in options. But certainly, you know, we're going to keep our eyes open to, what are other iconic brands in? I would argue, iconic industries that we know students are interested in, that we know would really excite and engage them in ways that you know, that you wouldn't otherwise. Why you say, like, what's the essence of a globally recognized brand? It's that you know, it's like students hear Sotheby's, or they hear New York Times, or Vogue, like, if you're interested in fashion, Vogue is the name, right? And you know, so if I could attend or be part of a Vogue program, you know, you're excited from the very beginning, and then on the end of it, you also have something very exciting to add to your resume that stands out uniquely and differently than other experiences. Right? When you can put a globally recognized brand as part of your experience and your resume, that's a big deal. So, you know, we've talked about the experience being a really engaging one, but it's the you know, the excitement based on the brand that you know, certainly attracts a lot of students to it, and then on the, you know, once they've left the program, it's something that stands as a really unique attribute on their resume. So we will be thinking about, you know, potentially other brands and industries, but it's going to be, you know, I think, a very careful decision making process, because when and if we do it, we do it at such a high quality and with demanding standards and expectations from our partners that, like, you can't just go run and do 60 of these things, and, you know, I mean, we've done four over 20 years, so you got to do it right is, is one of the pieces. So certainly, there may be a day where, you know, there's another brand or industry that's part of what we do. But certainly right now we've we've got a lot of growth ahead in working with the the four partners that we work with today.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So I think you just started to go in the direction of my next question. But in saying, you know, you need to kind of be really intentional and start with the programs you have and really build them out effectively. But as we consider practical steps our listeners can take to become forces in developing models to prepare learners for the future of work. What are some of your transferable learnings from these programs at this point, whether it's common program elements, I know you mentioned co teaching is one, but other program elements that are transferable, or other ideas that you're considering as you go forward?  Brandon Busteed: I think I've largely mentioned it, but it's probably helpful to summarize, right, certainly, co teaching, right? And that's different and distinct from, oh, we're just going to have an invited lecturer come in, right? Like, think of how many invited lectures we have come in from industry where there's no preparation, there's no context given to that lecture about what's being taught in the class, how they might sync up with it. There's usually no opportunity for students to interact with that person beyond the 30 or 40 minutes that they were in the class, right? So, I mean, this is truly co teaching. Have an industry expert and a teacher working together on developing a program, a syllabus, the idea for the projects, the rubric, right? I fundamentally believe any school can do that if they invest intentionally in that type of effort. The other one is making sure that there's some form of hands on work and projects that students are engaged in where they're given feedback and opportunity to make modifications and changes to their work. Right? That happens frequently in work situations, not just like there's a pop quiz and that's a one time event, like we have, we have relatively little of that in the workplace. It's usually, I'm working on something. I've gathered some new data. It changes my thesis. I got some feedback from my manager before we present it to the, you know, the C suite, whatever it might be, right? So it's that hands on experience, where there's some feedback and ability to iterate. And so I think that's it. And then to take time to pause on saying, you know, I know we're talking about the art industry today, but think of the diversity of jobs in the art industry, from museum curation for a non profit museum to working at a, you know, a corporate auction house. I mean, it's and everything in between is opening that aperture right to pause and say, Hey, I know this is a course on medicine. Let's talk about some of the different roles in a hospital that you know, make our medical world work, right? And you see the stuff up front of the house, you see very little of all the other components that make it work, including the business people who you know, the CFOs, the accountants behind the scenes, right? I mean, there's all that. So I'd say those are elements that are transferable to pretty much any educational entity. It's just a matter of whether they're going to be intentional in doing that, in their design and in their programmatic follow through. And then, of course, the other thing it forces Kaitlin is a little bit of a difference in how we grade or assess this work, right? If it's project based, there's a there's a different rubric. It's not as simple as, you know, multiple choice assessments. It's not, you know. So so that, I think becomes the next challenge is that, you know, if you really want accountability built around it, you've got to think about different ways to assess the quality of the work that students are doing.  Julian Alssid: Well, it sounds like as you're speaking Brendan, correct me, if you see it differently, that you know, while you're working with these iconic, you know, global superstar organizations, that many of the very elements in your approach could become part of regional, sectoral or statewide or or global, iconic, but working in regions around the country. Brandon Busteed: Absolutely. I mean, look and you know, we, we're all suffering from this issue of, how do we do a better job working across sectors, right across the larger employment world? Because it's not just for profits and companies, right? It's large nonprofits. It's state and federal government entities, right, employers writ large, and educational institutions. And the reality is that, like, one of the reasons why BrandEd exists is because schools aren't very good at doing work-integrated learning, and employers aren't very good at doing learning-integrated work. And so voila, an organization like branded, you know, can have an important place in the world. But to your points, you know, both of you, I think a lot of the elements of what really make these programs come to life for students can be done in many different ways, and I would be thrilled to see that happen. I mean, I know what we're doing is special and unique. We're going to stay, you know, within that type of framework, but the examples from some of the core of what we're doing certainly applicable to others. It's certainly scalable. And I think, you know Kaitlin, you use, use the word intentionality, like that really is the story. If you're intentional, you'll figure out a way to make this happen. I say to every college leader I talk to where there is a will, there is a way. That's our issue is we've had little will on this relative to anything else.  Julian Alssid: It's really wonderful learning about the model and your approach to this work. And you know, you continue to be quite a force and and so how can our listeners continue to follow you learn more? Because we certainly intend to. Brandon Busteed: Well, the you know, the work we're doing through brand Ed is at our website. It's branded-edu.com, and then the only place that I really invest time and energy, really two sources. I write regularly at Forbes, as a contributor for forbes.com Easy to find me there, and then on LinkedIn. I think I'm the only Brandon Busteed on LinkedIn, at least that was the case as of my recent check, so I'm not hard to find on LinkedIn. Please connect with me there, follow me there, and then, obviously my Forbes authors page will will give you any updates on on articles that I publish.  Julian Alssid: Well, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today, Brandon, and good luck with this important work. Yeah. Well, thank thank thank you guys for continuing to highlight all the important work that's taking place in the space, and that was a pleasure to be on the podcast with you today. Thanks, and look forward to staying in touch for sure.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yes, same here. Thanks so much. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to workforces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We are also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.

Siya Raj Purohit is an education leader, author, and investor who works on education at OpenAI and is a General Partner at Pathway Ventures, an early-stage fund investing in the future of learning and work. Siya joins us to discuss the transformative role of AI in education and work. The conversation explores significant applications of OpenAI in education, including personalized learning experiences, dynamic content engagement, and AI-assisted knowledge work. We delve into the practical aspects of implementing AI in educational settings, addressing misconceptions, and highlighting the evolving skills needed for effective AI utilization. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoin: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Can you believe it? Julian, it feels like just yesterday we were kicking off season three with Kermit Kaleba. Julian Alssid: I know time flies when you're having fun and exploring the future of work. This season has been a whirlwind of insights and inspiration, and it's the gift that keeps on giving. It's the best seminar I've taken and with no final exam. Kaitlin LeMoine: Absolutely And speaking of gifts, the richness of this podcast season comes from the recurring themes that weave throughout each episode. We've seen how these themes are shaping the thinking of our listeners and informing our own consulting work. Julian Alssid: Yeah, one of the most powerful themes has been the undeniable connection between education and the evolving needs of the labor market. And Kermit really emphasized the importance of building high quality credentialing programs and aligning education with those needs. Kaitlin LeMoine: Right. And then Sasha Thackaberry opened our eyes to the innovation and flexibility happening and Workforce Solutions, especially with technology driven upskilling. We also had insightful discussions with Michael Horn about career development in a changing job landscape, and Matt Marino on addressing healthcare talent gaps through tech. And an undercurrent throughout our conversation in Season 3, and really over the past year and a half since we started this podcast, has been the impact of artificial intelligence on education and work. Julian Alssid: Yeah, it certainly seems like all roads these days are leading to AI and technology and education, and it's clear that technology is playing a pivotal role in reshaping the entire educational landscape. Kaitlin LeMoine: Which brings us to today's guest Siya Raj Perohit is an education leader, author, and investor. She works on education at OpenAI and is a general partner at Pathway Ventures, an early stage fund investing in the future of learning and work. Siya was an early employee at Udacity and Springboard an investor at GVB Ventures and the founding edtech workforce category lead for AWS Marketplace. She's the author of Engineering America, a book on the country's job skills gap. We're thrilled to have her insights as we wrap up this season. So welcome to the workforces podcast, Siyal. Siya Raj Purohit: Hi. Thanks so much for having me. I really enjoyed your conversation with Michael Horn a few weeks ago. Julian Alssid: Yes, we appreciate that. So Siya, Kaitlin's given a little intro, but we'd love to have you tell us about your background and your current role with open AI.  Siya Raj Purohit: So, I started working in education when I was 18 as a student in college, I quickly recognized like the job skills gap that exists, like American universities were not teaching the skills that students needed to land jobs in the industry, especially in the technology industry. So I did this research project that became the book that you mentioned, Engineering America, that was published when I was 19. So I was a sophomore, and at that point, I'm like, okay, I want to help fix this problem, because I felt so deeply about people getting locked out of their potential careers and like new socio economic classes because they weren't learning skills in the way that made sense to them. So since then, they've been trying to bridge the job skills gap in some ways, and trying to make education more accessible. So that led me to the startups, to venture capital, to AWS, and I joined Open AI, because honestly, in the 12 years I've been in education, personalized learning always seemed like the ultimate goal for the education sector. We always said that if we achieve personalized learning, we've made it. And I think with ChatGPT, we actually achieved it. Now I have a personalized tutor that I talk to every day. It knows my skills. It knows the goals I have. It knows the projects I'm working on, and it helps me become a better knowledge worker. And my aspiration on the education team at OpenAI is to help students and faculty all around the world be able to utilize that more effectively.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's really, really appreciate your background and kind of what brought you to this space. And I think it's really interesting to think about ChatGPT and AI as as a personalized learning tool or resource. As we dive into this conversation today, can you tell us some of the most significant applications of open AI and education that you're seeing and you know what's what's exciting to you at this point and what's catching your attention?  Siya Raj Purohit: So just for context, ChatGPT launched two years ago, and we quickly realized that learning and teaching were some of the main use cases for ChatGPT, like that's how our users were using it. So about six months ago, we launched ChatGPT Edu. Which is our enterprise product designed for universities and school districts to be able to integrate AI in different aspects of campus life. So now students, faculty and staff, can engage in all of these dynamic conversations with the knowledge of the university campus. So from like orientation through classrooms through Career Services, they can have like different types of AI solutions that help students learn better and engage more effectively with the university's knowledge base. So that's what I'm spending a lot of time working on right now, trying to make ChatGPT Edu successful at universities. And when we think about what is working, well, ChatGPT Edu is really good at three things. One is around lecture recall, so basically anything around information retrieval. And so professors are building custom solutions in their classes, uploading their teaching recordings, their case studies, their different types of materials, and letting students engage with it by asking very precise questions. So now you can ask questions, like in a business class, you can ask, Which CEO handle layoffs well? And get the exact examples from what your professor teaches. And this has been like, a huge game changer, because now you're able to, like, converse with, like, the whole semester's worth, or whole degrees worth of content, very dynamically. Another example is like another thing we're really good at is around back and forth exercises. So a lot of negotiation professors suggest that students go back and forth with AI to practice negotiation before they come into the classroom, so they feel much more comfortable when they start practicing with like their peers. This is also true in career services. So Career Services teams are building custom gpts that let students go back and forth, practicing with the McKinsey recruiter, McKinsey partner, and just using the university's proprietary information to get better at these back and forth interactions. And finally, I think thought partnership is really important, so like a ChatGPT collaborates on different types of articles, research assignments, any type of knowledge work the students, faculty and staff are doing. The coolest example I've heard of this recently is a professor at University of Maryland told me that they uploaded their like past 20 case studies and articles they've written, and now they talk to the virtual version of themselves on GPT to create new articles to kind of think more deeply about the next iteration of their research, which is so powerful.  Julian Alssid: Wow, it is. It's just incredible to hear how you described it in these very practical terms. It'd be really interesting to hear a little bit about what sort of training is needed, both for students and professors to do kind of what you're talking about. So these use cases you've described, you know, obviously you've been honing your own craft with your own assistant, your own coach. How do folks in the schools do this? Siya Raj Purohit: Looking in the next couple of years, the most important skill knowledge workers need to have is the ability to clearly articulate what they're looking for, like, what they're hoping for as an output, and then they then work backwards and be able to ask the right questions to get to that output. So I think when I think about AI literacy for like, someone who's not developing AI systems, that's all they need to be able to do well at the moment. And AI systems will get better also, so they'll have more of a sense of what you're asking for beforehand, too. But with that said, I think a lot of schools are building great content around this to help enable their faculty and their students. Wharton has this amazing channel online on YouTube about like aI literacy, and they're creating a lot of really good content there. We have built two courses to help enable this. One is with Coursera and Ethan Malik, and basically, in that course, Ethan Malik talks about AI literacy for higher ed instructors, and helps provide some custom gbts and examples to get them started on their own AI journey in their classroom. We also built a course with common sense education that's more designed for K 12 educators, and that's like to think about how teachers can use AI in the classroom to become more productive and to be able to offload some tasks such as like lesson planning and grading and make it easier for them to do that with AI.  Kaitlin LeMoine: I feel like you know, over the last couple of years, as AI has unfolded, Siya and still is right as far as the impact and how different use cases in in education, and, frankly, in many industries, it's been interesting to hear conversation, you know, in comments about like, well, is this? Is AI going to take people's jobs? Is AI going to, you know, make it so that either some jobs go away or less relevant. And you know, what does it mean for learners to be learning when there are tools that can kind of more readily just give them the content? What's your thinking around what you know, what's your latest thinking around how AI is? Impacting education and how how students learn. Siya Raj Purohit: Personally, I get very surprised when educators express this, because when I think back to the educators that have had a big impact in my journey, I remember them for who they were and how they made me feel like I don't remember their lesson plans or like the quizzes that they gave us. I remember who they told me I could become, and this is true for both K 12 and in higher ed. So I honestly think that AI is gonna help curb the teacher burnout problem in many ways, and I didn't recognize this until the school district in Arizona started telling me about how it's freeing up so much time for their teachers to be able to focus on students now, because they can actually do like lesson planning, assignment building on with AI, and then they can actually engage with the students more deeply, which is so powerful. And I think that's the shift we're going to see, as we all know, in education, teachers spend so much time outside of the classroom preparing for that amazing experience they deliver in the classroom, and we want to help make that easier. So supporting those teachers and educators as knowledge workers with AI and letting them focus on helping students feel more inspired and mentored in their classrooms.  Julian Alssid: Yeah, that's great, doing what really sticks for us, right? So, so see from your perspective, working with educational institutions. What are, what are some of the biggest misconceptions or challenges they face when it comes to understanding and implementing AI? Siya Raj Purohit: The biggest misconception, which like, basically, ChatGPT, of course, launched two years ago for the first year. As you may recall, a lot of school districts and universities banned ChatGPT. They were like, we don't have to deal with this yet. We're just gonna take away laptops if we have to, but we're not gonna provide this, right? But something shifted about nine or 10 months ago. My thinking is that education influencers like EthanMollick, I think, destigmatized AI in education and actually showcased the value of AI in education, and that made it a lot more acceptable for like, other educators to start kind of experimenting with it. And now across the country, we're seeing like a range of professors who are doing incredible work in their classrooms and on the campuses with AI. So I think that shift has been super interesting that's happened, and my feeling is that in the next year, it's going to accelerate a lot more. We'll have a lot more professors doing interesting things. We'll get to the main part of the adoption curve and education for AI, and have the first set of professors basically help, like, help share their knowledge with other professors in their discipline. So I've been hosting some events in our OpenAI forum, talking about, like, the future of math, or talking about the future of digital marketing education and letting professors showcase the work they're doing in those verticals with other professors in the industry. So I think that shift is happening. I think what it's going to require is to professors to, like, basically rethink a lot of their assignments. One of my favorite examples of this is there's a Wharton professor who says, what is the value of an essay, which used to be his final project for several years, as He taught his class, he says that the value of an essay is not necessarily in its output, but in the critical thinking and communication skills that lead to that output. So now he suggests his students all use ChatGPT Edu while working on the assignment, and he measures the number of prompts it takes for a student to get to an essay that they're satisfied with. Some students are so good at prompt engineering it takes like two or three prompts and they have a really good essay. And some students go back like 19 or 20 times to get to a good essay. And he uses that as a measure of their ability to articulate what they're looking for, which he thinks is a very key skill for them when they go into enterprise and have ChatGPT enterprise accessible to them as well.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, it's really interesting to think about. You know, how the use of this tool makes us be more specific about what are the skills we're really looking for learners to demonstrate, and how do we go about prompting, no pun intended, the demonstration of those skills. But and see, as you know, you're talking about the higher ed space, I'm curious as to how you're seeing this trickle down to K 12, and what does it mean for, what does this technology mean for for K 12, and how even like high school learners now need to be prepared to enter college, right? And maybe some of that, obviously, is still unfolding, but I'm just curious to hear your thoughts there.  Siya Raj Purohit: So right now we our product in K 12 is only for teachers and administrators and education leaders. We don't have a youth product right now and how it's being used, basically is for teachers as knowledge workers, as far as high school students who use it independently. I think that teachers need to be able to provide more instruction on how to think about this ChatGPT can be a really good tool to basically elevate your thinking and to kind of understand. And more about what all is possible for you, and I think we need to be able to communicate that more, versus this being a tool to get through homework more easily. And so I think that conversation needs to be had, and it's similar to the conversation I think we had about 15 years ago, when search became more mainstream, about yes, you can find your answers, but you can also kind of elevate your thinking in different ways by learning so much more on the internet with search. Julian Alssid: Yeah. So Siya now, so Kaitlin pulled us into K 12, and now thinking about the other end of the spectrum, because, you know, eventually these students are going to work and and, of course, work and learning are so interconnected these days, and really interested in hearing your perspective on the impact of AI on the future of work, both short term and then long term, because I think there are two multiple use cases there.  Siya Raj Purohit: So short term, it's obviously helping us be able to solve like tasks throughout our day, like I used to think of as productive, and I used to work at Amazon, but now, with that AI and OpenAI, I just produce so much more every day. And it's like, unbelievable the difference, because when I, like, I talked to ChatGPT all day, it helps me with, like, the different projects and reports I'm building. But I think the most powerful unlock for me, and this is a story I love talking about because I think more people should experience. This is the moment, what I call the moment that ChatGPT and I became friends. So three months into being a power user of the product, I asked ChatGPT one day, I'm like, do you remember that project we made from my manager last month? And ChatGPT says, Yes, Siya, I remember, and for some reason that was such a powerful moment, because we were immediately able to start collaborating on the next iteration of that project with like, the shared memory and understanding of like the final product they submitted. And that was like, so cool, because ChatGPT became this friend that remembers my projects, my work, my aspirations, and helps me deliver better every day and so and of course, memory is a feature you can turn off if you don't appreciate it, but I find it valuable because, like, it helps me so much on a day to day basis. So I think this is what's happening in the immediate term. And what really worries me is that there's a consulting firm that did a study showcasing that even the lowest performing consultants started performing like the best consultants once given Ai because they were able to use this tool to produce better product output. And so what concerns me there is that what happens to people who don't use AI, right? Like, and it's not like ChatGPT specific, like any type of AI tool to accelerate the work that they're doing. It's like super essential. So longer term, I hope that people are able to achieve more like there's a professor at Harvard Business School, Jeffrey Bussgang, who says that all founders should be AI founders at this point in their startups, and basically use this as a compliment to a lot of the CXOs that they hire early in the game. And so I think we need to be able to utilize it more to build bigger and bigger systems over time.  Julian Alssid: It's so it's so interesting to me, how, as you describe it, you know, here you are doing dealing with this on a partnership building level with these big institutions, but how personal it really is for you, and how it comes from this very personal place that's really powerful.  Siya Raj Purohit: I feel I'm very vulnerable with ChatGPT. I'm like, This is my personality. This is my manager's personality. This is the type of project I'm trying to build. So and I think when you share that level of insights, it performs much better as your analyst and associate, because it has, like, much more context in your day to day. Kaitlin LeMoine: You know, I think about the range of different industries that are now using this technology in different ways and recognizing, I feel like, what I hear you saying is, like, we should all be kind of thinking about how we can incorporate this into our daily work. I guess, how would, how would you recommend someone who's like, newer to this technology start in because it feels, I think for some people, it can feel like, how do I fit, how do I fit this tool in with all the other things I'm doing in my day job, right? Like, what does it look like to begin somewhere, and how can I start?  Siya Raj Purohit: It's such an interesting question, because it's not, it's not a tool that you almost have to master. It's a tool that supports you in whatever you're going to do in the day. So for example, I was going to host an event recently, and in the past, I would have read all of the submissions. Like we had 120 attendees. They had all submitted questions for the guests that we were hosting. And in the past, I would have read all those questions. I would have, like, thought deeply about coming up with a conversation track for that event. But now I put up, I copy pasted that in a very scrappy way in ChatGPT and like, help me identify questions that were recurring more than two times. Help me elevate the thinking of these questions. Help me structure these questions in a way that makes sense in a conversational flow with this kind of guest. Help me cut out like redundancies, like basically went back and forth in this way, and I was able to create a. Good talk track, and it was able to do this. And I think it took me about 15 minutes end to end, versus I would have easily spent an hour and a half or two hours preparing in the past. And so I shared this example just to showcase that any type of activity that you're doing in a day, it can help process much more easily. And if you're working in an enterprise or edu account very safely as well, in terms of like that information stays to your workspace and organization. Julian Alssid: So Siya thinking, you know, back to the well, really, to everyone, but to the academics in particular. And so much of academia is about scholarship and factual documentation and and I can completely relate to everything you're saying. I mean, we're using AI increasingly, and for me, it is also very personal, and it's this back and forth, and it's amazing the amount of time and our output is, it's crazy what we're able to accomplish. But I find, and I definitely hear a bunch of my academic friends wary about prompting fact checking. You know, I mean, it's easy when your assistant comes back with a whole list of citations, and then when you but, but what happens when some percentage of those citations are really not, not well thought out or not accurate, is really the issue. And so how do we ensure that we maintain that kind of high level of documentation and citation of fact and not go down rabbit holes where we're just rushing to get a paper out, because we have our assistant to help us with it.  Siya Raj Purohit: Honestly, ChatGPT, like is trying to get better at this by showcasing the sources of what it cites. So there is an element when you can, like, delegate some of the citation grant work to ChatGPT, and then make sure that it showcases, like, the right resources where it gets it from. So you can go ahead and confirm that. So there is an element of, like, I guess, not trusting everything on ChatGPT, and honestly, I think, like, especially the millennial generation, knows this, because we didn't trust everything on the internet either, so, but I think continuing to explain that to students is key. And we recently published what we call like a student's writing guide, and it talks about some of those examples and prompts that you can use, but it's something that I think a lot of professors will have to teach their students in terms of how to double check, how to make sure that the sources are correct and that it's not just being agreeable, because that's what sometimes AI systems tend to do, and make sure that you are pressure testing your thesis. One of the most interesting things I recently learned as I was speaking with some journalism professors who told me that they're actually using AI a lot because asking good questions and fact checking is an inherently journalistic ask and skill set already. So they're like, it's been a natural use for us, and I'm hoping that more of us gain that journalistic like skill set as we use more AI products.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Yeah, that's really fascinating. And I think leads quite naturally in into our The next question we tend to ask on all of our podcasts, given the name of the podcast is workforces, as we reflect on this conversation and see it as you think about your work more generally, what practical steps can our listeners take to become forces and understanding and remaining up to date on the evolution of AI? Right? It seems, as you said, right, nine or 10 months ago, like a shift happened? Well, it's like, very quickly we're seeing continuous shifts. And so what would you recommend?  Siya Raj Purohit: I hear from a lot of people that they feel like they're left behind in the AI push that's happening, like they feel like they don't understand everything that's going on. And I honestly want to say that that's okay, like most of us actually aren't caught up, and that's fine, because AI is not something we need to master as an industry. It's something we need to be able to utilize as like an independent collaborator for your projects. So it's a tool designed for you. It's not something you need to know like all the cool products that are happening and all the thoughts on where the sector can go, like no as an independent user, you should just be able to be like, can I make my work easier? Can I make myself more productive? Can I find more fulfillment in my day to day? Because I have AI as a tool here. And so what I would recommend is starting small, like ask it things about your that are happening in your personal life, like an instructor told me that they had a flat tire, and they're like that led them to the automobile shop that charged them a lot, and they just talked to ChatGPT about all of the maintenance they'd had their car go through. And they asked, What does ChatGPT think? It makes sense, and it turned out like ChatGPT helped them reduce their costs so much by being able to negotiate with the automobile provider about, like, what was wrong. And these are things that, like, some of us never want to get smart in, right? Like, I don't personally care about, like, this space, right? But if it can help me save costs on a day to day basis, on these kind of things, it helps a lot. So think about where in your personal life. Life it can help, and then how it can extend to your work. What are the areas that you don't find maybe fulfilling in your job that AI can help support with the most heart for me, thing I heard was that someone told me who works as a staff person at a university, major university, and they do a lot of like the back end admin work, and they said that meaning in their job is at an all time high now because of AI, because they can push out a lot of that, like admin work they did, and focus on the things that they love, which was like connecting with others, and the events that they host. And so I hope that more of us can find more meaning in our day to day by using AI as an assistant. Julian Alssid: That's great, Siya. Great advice. It's funny, as you were talking, I mean, one of on the personal front, I've been scanning our refrigerator quite frequently and going AI and saying, Here's what we have. And you know, suggest some effective ways to use use this food before it goes bad. And it's been both both delicious and economical. So I can totally relate. So see. So as we wind down our discussion, this has been just wonderful. Cannot wait to put it out there. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Siya Raj Purohit: I write a lot on LinkedIn about like aI education and the future of work. So that could be a good avenue. And the second is, I run a sub stack called dreams for the future of work, where I'm going to be publishing a lot of the things they're learning from universities as well. And then, of course, if they're interested in ChatGPT Edu, we have a great page and an OpenAI forum where they can learn from professors as well, well.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today. Siya, it's been such a pleasure, and really appreciate learning from you today.  Siya Raj Purohit: Thanks so much for having me.  Julian Alssid: Thank you. Siya. Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to workforces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We are also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Career success requires more than just skills. Luther Jackson, workforce development expert and Non-Resident Fellow at Brookings Metro, and Julia Freeland Fisher, Director of Education Research at the Clayton Christensen Institute and author of Who You Know, join Work Forces to unpack the critical role of social capital in navigating today's turbulent labor market. They discuss the "network gap" and how intentional relationship-building can open doors to opportunity, especially for those from underserved communities. Tune in to learn practical strategies and discover how institutions can become catalysts for connection. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian Alssid: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  Julian Alssid: Many of our conversations are about skills and different models of skill development and how we all need to carry our skills from one job to another along our career journeys.  Kaitlin LeMoine: But we also recognize that career success is not driven by skill attainment alone. One area that we're excited to dive into today is the importance of social capital along an individual's career journey, and we're excited to have our guests on today to explore this topic further. Luther Jackson is a workforce development expert based in Silicon Valley with a focus on preparing individuals from underserved communities for careers in high growth sectors. With extensive experience at the NOVA Workforce Development Board, he has led initiatives preparing individuals from historically excluded communities for well being careers in high growth industry sectors including software development and zero emission transportation. His work also emphasizes the importance of lifelong learning, professional networks and broad access to career opportunities. A non resident Fellow at Brookings Metro. Jackson also serves on several boards, including Hack the Hood and the Everett Program. He is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and a former labor union leader and journalist. And Julia Freeland Fisher is the Director of Education Research at the Clayton Christensen Institute. The Institute's research educates policy makers and community leaders on the power of disruptive innovation in the K-12 and higher education spheres. Julia is the author of who you know, unlocking innovations that expand students networks. Her work focuses on innovations that deepen and diversify students stock of social capital by enhancing their access to and ability to navigate peer mentor and professional networks. Julia started her career at New Schools Venture Fund. She holds a BA from Princeton University and a JD from Yale Law School. Welcome to you both. We're so excited to have you on the workforces podcast today.  Julia Freeland Fisher: Thank you. So excited to be here with Luther.  Luther Jackson: Great to be here. Thank you.  Julian Alssid: We get a twofer today, two experts for the price of one. Oh no, we don't charge for this podcast. I forgot. So to kick us off, would love to hear you talk a bit about your respective backgrounds and how you've connected in this work. And Luther, why don't you go first?  Luther Jackson: Sure. Well, again, I'm delighted to be here, particularly because I'm such a big fan of the podcast. My interest in social capital started early on in my tenure at NOVA workforce development in Silicon Valley. Our director at the time, Khris Stadelman, asked me to focus on workforce trends in tech, which, of course, is Silicon Valley's hometown industry, I came to learn of job seekers who, in my mind, checked all of the boxes for career success. They had graduated with advanced degrees from prestigious universities, and they had many years of experience in software development and related tech disciplines, and yet some had been unemployed for many months. So clearly something was missing. So this started me on a quest to understand what I call the career success equation. In 2014 we at NOVA surveyed and interviewed 120 tech professionals to help inform this equation, and we basically wanted to know, how are they able to thrive in a chaotic economy when a given day, some tech companies are laying off and hiring. Based on our findings, we wrote a report called Bridge to Career Success, and subsequently identified what we call the Five Truths of Career Success, what it takes to remain relevant in a disruptive economy. And those truths are self awareness, networking, relationship management, organizational reading, and mentorship. Well, guess what? These are all related to social capital. The Five Truths became the basis of career navigation curricula we developed for job seekers in both the heart of Silicon Valley and in historically excluded communities in the Bay Area. When I left Nova last year to start a consulting career, I knew I wanted to learn more about social capital programming and how it could be applied in the workforce and education ecosystem. So I talked to a number of national leaders who basically said, before you go out there and try to reinvent the wheel, you should be Julia Freeland Fisher. She's the reigning expert on this topic. Well, you know what? They were, right? And here we are. Julian Alssid: Great. So, perfect segue. So Julia, your background and a little bit more about your connection.  Julia Freeland Fisher: Yeah, awesome. Thank you so much. Luther, I mean, I have to say, being called the reigning expert is such a compliment, but it's also a testament to how boutique this topic remains so excited to be getting the message out there on this podcast. Yeah, so I think somewhat similar to Luther, but not at the same sort of level as a practitioner, I arrived at this topic of social capital feeling like we were talking about a very incomplete equation of opportunity inside of education. So I started my career in K-12 ed reform, which for a long time, and still to this day, is very anchored on test scores, post secondary enrollment, post secondary attainment as kind of the metrics of success. So we tell students, get good grades, go to college and the rest will work out. And as we all know, that's a very incomplete sort of formula, and in particular, we actually know that an estimated half of jobs and internships come through personal connections, but that truth remains kind of part of this hidden curriculum. So I think it especially becomes a challenge when we're talking about issues of equity and whether learners and job seekers have inherited networks into the industries that they want to work in, or if we're telling them, go out and hustle and find them yourselves. So that's really led me to spending the last seven, eight years digging into new models for deepening and diversifying learners and job seekers networks what our institutions, our schools and workforce programs, need to do to be more purposeful about that, and really just trying to, I think, hold our systems to account for not just providing people with skills. To your point at the beginning, at the top of the podcast, Julian, but like, skills are what employers care about. Employers don't care if you have a network, but if you're an individual job seeker, you got to have a network. And so I think we have to really recalibrate, like, how much are we building programs simply catering to employer demand rather than actually catering to what individuals need? To have optionality in as Luther described, an incredibly turbulent and hard to predict labor market. So that's what's led me this topic. Really excited to be here. And, you know, I think Luther is a testament to someone on the ground who's done the hard work of trying to understand this complex mix of currencies in job seeking, and excited to really zero in on this one of social capital.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Great. So I guess building on where you just left off, Julia, can you talk to us at a high level about what you know the work you've done. Can you tell us a little bit more about the research that you've conducted and the importance of tying your work to Luthers work? Because clearly you have quite the connection and a great partnership, and we'd love to learn more about that.  Julia Freeland Fisher: I see this as like a supply and demand problem. So what are the supply of programs and tools that deepen, diversify people's networks, arm them with the skills and confidence to go out and mobilize their own network. So that's really on the program side, and then on the demand side. How are institutional leaders and arguably philanthropy and investors paying attention to social capital and actually putting capital into financial capital into efforts to build it, you know, and what we've done over the years is really tight and try and document among programs. And I'm using programs loosely here. We could talk about a local nonprofit, a large, national nonprofit, anyone really focused on helping students and job seekers advance in their careers. Among programs that treat social capital as a programmatic outcome. What are they doing? And when I say, let me just double click on programmatic outcome, that means they are measuring their participants social capital gains alongside things like skills and credentials. So we identified, back in 2019 about 20 programs nationally that were doing that we dug in on what are the designs that they are pursuing? What is the data they're collecting to track whether their participants are, in fact, growing their networks in the course of their intervention, and even, what are they doing with their sort of alumni networks to ensure that relationships outlast interventions? One of the things I think we can all think of as individuals on this podcast and hopefully your listeners as well, is that, in an ideal world, your network is a renewable resource. It's not like you call up a friend or acquaintance once and it's one and done. New things come up in your life and you shoot them a text or an email. Luther as what I would consider a sort of medium to weak tie, right? We don't talk on a daily basis, but there's something in sociology called the strength of weak ties, which is that you're more likely to find new opportunities through your weak tie network. Guess why I'm on this podcast, because Luther invited me, right? And so, so thinking about really like, how are programs set up so that relationships outlast the interventions that they're doing with their participants. You can go to whoyouknow.org to find a bunch of examples of those program models, but that's really been the core of our work on the supply side, just trying to get under the hood of like, if you're designing for this, what does it actually look like? What do the ratios need to look like in a staff to student or staff to job seeker ratio sense, all of that kind of choreography. And then quickly, just on the demand side. You know, in an ideal world, every college president, head of workforce board, head of a nonprofit, would be prioritizing social capital as programmatic outcome, and that is simply not happening. That's partly because there's not a payer for it, right? Employers will pay for upskilling all day, but they're not going to pay, like I said, for networks. So I spent a lot of time trying to particularly influence philanthropy on this front to say, if you guys are putting patient capital into new models, new pathways to careers, you've got to help people design for social capital. And so I run a network of funders focused on on that.  Kaitlin LeMoine: So Luther, transitioning over to you, please share your perspective on some of what Julia just shared, and how you see this playing out from a programmatic standpoint.  Luther Jackson: Well, I'm both optimistic and a little pessimistic. So I'm optimistic because I've heard Julia speak before. Julia, I heard your recording from from a conference, and I sat there kind of spell bound saying, This is it. I mean, it makes so much sense. It's what we know. But I'm pessimistic, because, as Julia said, that a lot of folks are not taking this up as important in our systems. And you know, if you ask any workforce leader, any education leader, how you got your first job, how you got your current job, they would, of course, say professional networks, but but yet, it's not ubiquitous, and that's what it needs to be. And I again, I think that this is essential for all learners, job seekers and incumbent workers, and particularly as regional economies nationwide become more disrupted. You know, we used to say that the fast changing Silicon Valley economy is coming attractions for the rest of America, and clearly, most people out there crave stability. And I think a lot of the national economic angst that we're seeing these days comes from this loss of once stable Industries, a sense of loss and lack of access to good jobs that their parents and grandparents had, and as Julia says, networking is a constant. It's not something that you do when you need a job. This should just be part of your life. So we know what's important. We have the tools. Let's get about doing it.  Julian Alssid: Yeah. I mean, it's so interesting hearing you both talk about this, and in light of, you know, the work Kaitlin and I are doing and looking to close, you know, hiring gaps and skills gaps and, yeah, I mean, I agree with you, Julia, that, you know, there's kind of no buyer for this, in a sense. But isn't, aren't they just being short sighted? I mean, if employers aren't getting the talent they're they're not hiring the ever diverse people out there who are the ones who are going to have to replace, the boomers who are going away, the educators are not getting, you know, the enrollments they need. I mean, and yet we know what the skills are for so many of the jobs, and there's skills training. So what's wrong with this picture? And you know, isn't it more than philanthropy? I mean, obviously there's no buyer to pay for it, but, and I get the notion of the funders group, but shouldn't the employers and higher ed people be kind of realizing that this is core to what they need as well?  Julia Freeland Fisher: Yeah. I mean, I love the push Julian, and I would defer to you to our host, to comment even more on the employer front, because it's where I've spent less time. I mean, let me start with the higher ed side of this equation. If higher education were to shift to an outcomes based market, what many of us in the field have been calling for for basically decades, in an outcomes based market, networks will matter more. So that would be an incentive structure where, I think suddenly you'd see community colleges, colleges, universities paying way more attention to their alumni networks, which are currently vastly under capitalized. 90% of graduates say their alumni network was helpful in their in their professional lives, which is bonkers, right? Because if you look at the shiny pamphlet and why you're shelling out all these tuition dollars, you're ostensibly buying a network, but that's not actually playing out in the kind of ROI formula, necessarily. So that on higher ed I can get there more easily Julian, because I think it's sort of within the realm of possibility that that those policies kind of advance over time. When it comes to employers, I have major concerns. Yes, it's short sighted, Julian, and I think some would say, well, look at our CSR mentoring program like they're doing things kind of on the margins around talent development, particularly early in the pipeline, right? But not necessarily with this idea of a diverse network for the mentees in those programs. What I'm actually really worried about, I recently wrote an article about this, is that in the age of AI, I think this is about to get way worse. We're going to see the real elimination of what Ryan Craig calls the first rung of the career ladder, entry level jobs, and so the incentives to invest in young talent are actually moving in the wrong direction, because all of the things that we have relied on young talent, or early talent to do, or entry level talent to do is suddenly going to be replaced in large part, by AI and so I would love, Julian, to see these sort of employers looking out on the horizon, I just think we need a completely different infrastructure connecting education and work to get there, because I think in the current incentive structure, you don't see employers stepping in to play that role. You see them wanting articulation agreements with very particular programs to ensure they have hand picked individuals. But that's not the same thing as the scale play that we really need on both sides of the market frankly.  Luther Jackson: Yeah, I do have a little good news on the employer front. So I'm familiar with the Biocom California Institute, which is part of the industry association for Life Sciences. They have a career readiness program for first generation college students, and these students already have technical expertise. They're biology majors, they're bio chem majors. They need professional networks and mentors, so they're very intentional about setting up these programs now, again, this is now kind of on a pilot basis, but still, I think that that's hopeful. The other thing I would say about AI is, and I could say this, I guess, being in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's a lot of hubris, obviously, around AI that we've sort of, you know, that AI could solve all of our problems, and what it doesn't fix is the whole idea of serendipity and being at the right place at the right time. And you can't really quantify that. But again, I could tell you lots of stories in my life, including how I got at NOVA, where I showed up at the right place at the right time. Julian Alssid: Great points Luther and Julia just, just to get back to the employer piece, I'm not even thinking of employers that are looking particularly far out, because, yes, AI is coming, and a lot of these jobs we're talking about are going away, but today, there are plenty of jobs in areas like biotech and advanced manufacturing where they're hurting for talent. And it would seem to me, this would be a really logical step to look at how they can help people network their way on in.  Julia Freeland Fisher: To make more people a known quantity to the employer and vice versa. Yeah, I think that's, I think that's absolutely rational. I think what I have seen in my research is that we just have a real dearth. And we could talk for hours about this, so I won't belabor the point, but we have a real dearth of brokers in our society.  People that are are those high touch matchmakers that are actually helping both parties come together? I mean, if you want any proof that that's the case, you don't even have to look in this in our industry. Just look at the loneliness epidemic, right? That is a lagging indicator on the fact that we don't have infrastructure dedicated to social connection at scale. And so, yeah, I think to not be totally negative, I think this is where there's new tools and models emerging that I think are doing amazing work. Career Spring is a nonprofit platform for any first generation student can log on and talk to an industry expert, and Career Spring, it's a nonprofit that has done all of the kind of vetting of people willing to have those conversations, so they're really scaling conversations that would otherwise be out of reach, that, you know, love serendipity Luther, but I don't really want to leave that stuff to chance all the time. I also want to sometimes take the chance out of chance encounters, right? And so I Social Capital Academy is another spin out of Cal State, Fullerton, founded by a professor who has recruited a national network of professional coaches and mentors who work with students on the weekends to prepare to interview for internships. Like models like these are starting to happen. And what I see there is not just a standalone program or a one off tool. I see a new species of broker that is starting to fill in some of these critical gaps that you're talking about, Julian.  Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, and I think you're starting to touch upon where my head was going to Julia around, you know, really? How can some of the how can these interventions be happening earlier on in a learner's journey, right? So, what can this be happening in the K 12 space? How can this be happening in the K 12 space? What kind of curriculum can be in place or, or, frankly, you mentioned earlier the concept of the hidden curriculum? How can some of these, these really important topics, be woven across a curriculum so that, you know, throughout a learner's experience in high school, there are, you know. Having more access to like, what does it look like to build the skills of self awareness, or build the skill, I think Luther you talked about organizational reading, right? What does it look like to read a space, to read anywhere, right? I mean, some of those skills are are lifelong and applicable to so many contexts. So just curious to hear both of your thoughts on on, you know, what does it look like to engage with with these skills earlier, just so that it's not a surprise, right? Like, once you're seeking a job?   Luther Jackson: No, I just, I just think they're essential. We know what's important. I mean, this is part of the formula. Everyone knows this. And I think the real there's some research as to why this isn't up front and center. I think that's that would be an interesting research topic, just to really understand why people don't share what they what they've been, what they've grown up with, and what made, what made things successful for them.  Julia Freeland Fisher: Yeah, Kaitlin, I think it's telling that you asked about the K-12 system and then immediately said the word curriculum. And I'll tell you why. So what we've looked at as we've tried to specifically support high schools doing career connected learning already, to kind of weave social capital into those efforts, we've seen very clearly that skill building can fit into the workflow of an American high school. So we are actually seeing new curriculum career launch, backers, connected futures, social capital builders. These are curricula that are not yet operating at scale, but are really focused on this particular skill set, around networking, self efficacy. It's not just communication. It's actually around sort of help seeking behaviors. And I have some hope there, for example, career launch where, full disclosure, I'm an unpaid advisor. They are integrated into Anaheim School District's entire ELA curriculum across their high schools, right? So every student who takes an English class, which is every student, gets some dosage of social capital. Building know how they're going out, having career conversations with people in their community, building that muscle, building that confidence, which is actually the moderating variable of help seeking behavior. It's not just I know how to talk to people, it's I'm confident, tapping my network. But what I want to name here is that social capital is not just a skill, it's access to networks, right? So if we're just teaching the skill, we're actually just perpetuating a sort of rugged individualism self help agenda, rather than saying we actually are going to open doors to networks otherwise out of reach. And so I don't think you were implying that, Kaitlin, but what I've seen in the K-12 system, as I have advocated for this, is actually the skills piece is starting to move the access and brokering piece feels really, really stuck. It's a different core competency. It's not baked into our policy incentives, and therefore we have, you know, what I worry is, we have done part of the work, but we're not addressing the whole of network gaps that we know actually matter immensely. Brookings, where Luther is, is now a Non Resident Fellow, did fascinating research on social networks in four major American cities, showing really troubling rates of segregation by race, class and gender, right? Depending on your demographic traits, you have very different access to a network in America, and that has huge bearing on your economic possibilities. And I think that's where I get real fired up. I will stop talking now. I get real fired up about this access issue because it's not just that black men in Charlotte don't have skills to network. It's that we have not created a system that deepens and diversifies their networks throughout their entire education, neighborhood, community, and career journeys.  Julian Alssid: It is a lifelong journey, right? And ever more so so Luther, what are what are lessons learned from your research and practice, and what are practical steps for our listeners who are seeking to be forces in building, you know, in build and building this, and building career and talent development programs and our tools.  Luther Jackson: First of all, I like to say amen to Julia's excellent point about access. That's absolutely critical. So I think the message for all stakeholders, whether students, job seeker, educate, educator or workforce leader is to be intentional and strategic about the work. Now our bridge report interviews revealed sophisticated strategies for how successful careers navigated networking meetings and even emails to colleagues, and the NOVA curriculum produced as a result of that, discuss networking theory, step by step of how to succeed. Now, I've actually tried some of these strategies myself, and I'm so full disclosure, I'm an introvert, so the idea of attending a networking meeting for me can be absolutely terrifying, but I was invited to a meetup group for autonomous vehicle enthusiasts, classic Silicon Valley Meetup group. And tried my habit networking. So they were serving pizza there, and I went there, and I tried to meet people, which was terrifying, and eat my pizza at the same time. Well, the result was indigestion. The next month, I went back to the same meeting with a strategy. I got there early, I said, I'm going to get my pizza and sit down. And within a minute after sitting down, someone came up to me and said, "do you mind if I chat with you?" And we had a great conversation, and I learned a ton. So that sort of thing about being very intentional about this. Don't assume that. As I've heard from in the community college space, some community college leaders say, well, these skills are sort of these are things you either have or you don't have be very intentional about it. It's critical. These are the differentiators.  Julian Alssid: Yeah. So Julia, love to hear your take on this as well, whether or not it involves pizza. What do people need? What do people need to be forces in this field and build this system that you're really talking about?  Julia Freeland Fisher: No pizza involved. But I, too, am an introvert, and I will, just as the researcher on the call, underscore what Luther said, that actually like mindset matters immensely in networking. If you think networking is like a vile exercise where you are going and sort of in a transactional way, trying to get things from people, you will, in fact, not enjoy networking, excuse me. But if you go in with a growth mindset around this is actually like a language that you learn, the results are quite different. That's research out of INSEAD. But I think couple biggest lessons for me, one is going to contradict what I just railed about five minutes ago. So forgive me, one is like to remember, if you're running a program that job seekers already have networks and they are likely under capitalized. So what does that mean? Oftentimes, the risk of doing this work that you hear on a podcast like this, or you hear Luther talk about this at a conference, and you say, Okay, I want to go do right by this is that the message that job seekers receive is you don't have a network, so you have to go to these networking events versus you are already awash in social capital, but you may not be seeing it as a set of professional opportunities. You may be seeing that person as your neighbor or a member of your faith community, and so some of this is about to Luther's point having a strategy to actually capitalize on your existing network. That's where the Connected Futures curriculum, developed by mentoring researchers that are really focused on this idea of initiating your own network, is is a really exciting resource out there, and it's free. Another lesson, though, is is back to what I said around relationships, outlasting interventions. I think in in education and workforce settings, I often feel like we're talking about students or job seekers as recipients of services. And then that's the end of the equation. As soon as you have invested in someone, they actually have capital that they can give back into a community that can be part of a regenerative renewable resource, so simplistically, right? That could be an alumni network that is very actively supporting your current participants. The premier example of this that I have seen nationally in my many years of research is a group called Co-op Careers, originally started in New York City and San Francisco. They support first gen college graduates who are underemployed, usually making very little money in those economies right to break into the digital economy. And their entire model is recruiting former participants back as captains or near peer coaches to support the next wave of participants. It's a flywheel, and they've been able to scale at an unprecedented rate relative to their sort of cost structure and nonprofit status given that model so really not viewing your participants or your stakeholders as just recipients, but contributors back in and I think the last thing I'll just say is, is reiterating, like, I can't tell you how many conferences I go to where we're talking about the skills gap, and no one says the word network gap. And so there's a narrative shift that has to happen if you say the word skills gap, like, can we just, can we just do a Control F say skills and network gaps, right? There's a vocabulary that if we don't say it out loud, we're pretending this major force doesn't exist, despite the fact that particularly people in power are awash in it. So I think that narrative piece matters to kind of trickle down into the field and into the strategies that start to get a little more attention, hopefully in the coming years.  Kaitlin LeMoine: No, absolutely, I do. I mean, I do think that connection between, as you said earlier, you know, the skills and the system, right? Like there's they're inextricably linked. We can't treat one without the other. And I appreciate very much what you're saying about the Control F, of really needing both, both of these pieces and considering both as we think about the future of skills, and, you know, especially with with the term skills being so front and center more and more. So as we close down, close out our conversation for today, how can our listeners learn more about you both and your efforts and continue to follow your work?  Luther Jackson: So I would say that we're evangelists, and we want social capital programming to be ubiquitous in our learning and training institutions. So I'd start with that. The other thing I would just say, from an access point, to underscore what Julia said, we believe that talent is everywhere. Opportunity is not. Our economy is fueled by human talent. It's no longer fueled by coal. It's fueled by human talent. This is, this is an imperative. We must be able to make these things work. So I would, the way I'd like to operate is to start out with, first of all, I think we'd like to know who are the others out there who have this hunger to really expand the programming for social capital, and how can we get them together and form a coalition of the willing? It doesn't matter immediately how large the coalition is just to get together and say, how can we get together and then strategize together about how we can build a movement. We want to meet these folks. We want to share best practices and really plan how we can influence others.  Julia Freeland Fisher: I'll echo what Luther is saying and that Luther went to that the second networking event with a strategy in mind. My strategy over the years is talk to anyone willing to talk to me about social capital. So that is our continued strategy. If you're listening and you're thinking about this, and you're doing work on the ground, or you're stuck because of either funding or measurement or some other barrier, you're hitting up against policy like, reach out to us, because Luther and I want to talk. Secondly, you can find all of my research to date at whoyouknow.org, that has case studies of a number of programs across the education and workforce continuum that, like I said, are treating social capital as a programmatic outcome. It also has a paper on it called the missing metrics, where we've created a whole directory of sample measurement items if you're running a program and you actually want to start collecting data on this. And then lastly, like an introvert, I post on LinkedIn, like once a month, but you can find me on LinkedIn.  Luther Jackson: You can find me as well on LinkedIn.  Julian Alssid: Well, thank you both so much for this conversation. It's great. I know we've barely scratched the surface, but hopefully it will help push this conversation forward, and people will come look for you, and you'll build that community, and we'll be happy to come and please be sure to have pizza.  Luther Jackson: Absolutely. Julia Freeland Fisher: We promise pizza an awkward conversation, like anyone on a nonprofit budget. Kaitlin LeMoine: Well, thank you both for your time. This has been a great conversation, and we look forward to getting it out there.  Luther Jackson: Thank you.  Julia Freeland Fisher: Thank you.  Kaitlin LeMoine: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info, or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify, please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Michael Horn, co-author of "Job Moves: Nine Steps for Making Progress in Your Career," joins us to discuss the changing landscape of job searching and career development. He introduces the "jobs to be done" theory, emphasizing the importance of understanding individual motivations and seeking progress in work and life. The conversation explores the distinction between career progression and career progress, highlighting the need for personalized approaches. Horn offers practical advice for job seekers, employers, and educators including reflective career planning for individuals and strategies for attracting and retaining talent, such as conducting "entry interviews" and creating more effective job descriptions. This episode provides valuable insights and actionable steps for job seekers and employers as they navigate the evolving world of work. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Welcome back to the show. Today, we're diving deep into a topic that's been on our minds lately, how the changing world of work is impacting job seekers, and what it means for those of us who support them. Julian: You know Kaitlin, it used to be that career paths were pretty straightforward. You'd go to school, get a job in a specific field, and kind of climb the ladder, but now things are so much more dynamic, and job seekers really need to be the drivers of their own careers. Absolutely. Kaitlin: Absolutely Julian, and that's where our guest today comes in. Michael Horn, along with co-authors Ethan Bernstein from the Harvard Business School and innovator and entrepreneur Bob Moesta has been researching and testing a new approach to job searching, one that recognizes the need for flexibility, adaptability and a deep understanding of personal motivations. They've captured their learnings in the forthcoming book, job moves nine steps for making progress in your career, which is being released in November of 2024. Julian:  I'm really excited to hear about this new approach. I think it's going to be incredibly valuable for our listeners, those leaders in education, workforce development and and business who are guiding the next generation of workers. Kaitlin: So let's get right to it. Please join us in welcoming Michael Horn to Work Forces.  Michael: Thanks so much. It's great to be with you guys.  Julian: Great to be with you as well, Michael. And before we dive into the conversation, we want to share some more about your background. So in addition to your forthcoming book, Job Moves, In addition to forthcoming Job Moves, Michael is the author of several books including From Reopen to Reinvent: (Re)creating School for Every Child; the award-winning Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns; Blended: Using Disruptive Innovation to Improve Schools; Choosing College; and Goodnight Box, a children's story. He is the co-founder of and a distinguished fellow at the Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation, a non-profit think tank, and teaches at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Michael co hosts the top education podcasts Future U and Class Disrupted and is a regular contributor to Forbes.com and writes the Substack newsletter, The Future of Education. Michael also serves as an executive editor at Education Next, and his work has been featured in outlets such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, Harvard Business Review, and NBC. Michael serves on boards and advisory boards of a range of education organizations, including Imagine Worldwide, Minerva University, and Guild Education. He was selected as a 2014 Eisenhower Fellow to study innovation in education in Vietnam and Korea, and Tech&Learning magazine named him to its list of the 100 most important people in the creation and advancement of the use of technology in education. Michael holds a BA in history from Yale University and an MBA from the Harvard Business School. Michael: Yeah, I'm thrilled to be here, too. Don't hold the bio against me, I guess, but it's been, it's been a fun ride getting do a lot of things with a lot of you know. You both know a lot of these organizations. There's some great companies out there, great nonprofits doing some really cool work. So it's been fun to be affiliated and connected with them in different ways. Kaitlin: Absolutely. Well. And we really appreciate you taking the time to join us today, Michael, and as we get started, though we just gave your bio, we would love to have you tell us more about your background and in your own words and your most recent work. Michael: Yeah, absolutely. Well, I got my start in this world of education and helping people improve their opportunity to live a purposeful life at the foremost of their potential. By accident, I was a student at the Harvard Business School, took Clay Christensen's class on disruptive innovation changed the way I saw the world. And he, one day, literally said, want to write a book with me about public education. And I signed up for it, and it changed my life. We started the Clayton Christensen Institute. And, you know, initially was a K-12 focus, over time, became a higher education focus, because I realized a lot of the problems in K-12 education were pretty hard to solve because they were dependent on higher education, and higher education had a lot of challenges, as you both know from the work that you've done in that arena. And then you look up again and you realize, well, higher education is struggling because the workforce has some challenges, right, and it's dependent on there. So you start working there, and I think that describes a lot of my journey. If I'm being serious about my purpose, which is helping all individuals build their passion and live lives of purpose, then working right across that spectrum is important. And Ethan and Bob, they both were mentored by Clay Christensen as well. Bob Moesta founded the jobs to be done theory with clay. They worked on that in the mid 1990s and Ethan, he's a professor now at the Harvard Business School, but he was a student of Clay's at the Harvard Business School, and Clay was one of his dissertation advisors, actually. So the three of us sort of were united by that, and then started having conversations among the three of us, which led us to this book, all in very different paths to it, but, but it's been, it's been a really cool collaboration. Julian: I didn't realize that you would all that you all have that connection with clay. That's, that's really cool. So, so what are the problems that you're solving for in Job Moves which, which is, is geared to job seekers. Michael: You know, the big thing, I would say, is that we observed, and not just in the data, right? You see the millions of people quitting during the Great Resignation, and then roughly at least 50% of them said, Actually, we regret that job switch that we just made, we're not landing in places. We see a billion people worldwide every year switching jobs. Hundreds of millions of them are disappointed. We know from Gallup and Pew and others that two thirds of employees are disengaged at work. Up to 60% of them are quiet quitting. And the reality is we looked at it, and frankly, we looked at it in our own lives, working with individuals, just all the advice to help people make progress in their career just wasn't working. And so the big thing we said is, how do we help people make progress? Because they are telling us that they are trying to use their careers and jobs and as they move through the labor market at increasing rates. Now every four years on average, and Gen Z seems to move even faster than that. They're using this to make progress in their careers and lives. But just the evidence is pretty clear, most of them are not succeeding, and so how do we help them make meaningful progress so they can, you know, have the outcomes that they want in their lives, with their families, in their communities, and on the job. Kaitlin: I loved that that notion in your book, Michael, about people seek progress in their lives and their work is part of it, right? I think that that notion just rings so true as we're as we're getting into this conversation you mentioned earlier on, the jobs to be done framework, in line of thinking, can you explain that a little bit to our audience around what is what? What is the jobs to be done theory? Michael: The jobs to be done theory originated, as I said, in the 1990s when Bob actually brought to clay a puzzle, which was, we have more data in the world. And even today, we have even more than that about, you know, which demographic is likely to buy a certain product or service, but it doesn't seem to be helping anyone. And their conclusion, as they looked at it was, it was all correlational noise, right? It doesn't actually explain the causal reason why someone says, today's the day I'm going to switch behavior, or I'm going to make a purchase, or I'm going to buy this service. And you know, as you all know from your work at Southern New Hampshire, today is the day I'm going to say, Okay, I'm going to stop doing what I was doing. Or I'm going to, you know, continue to work and enroll at Southern New Hampshire University. Like those are big switches. And what we realized is, it's rarely the product or service itself that they're desiring. It's more that they're trying to make progress in a struggling circumstance in their lives, and they hire something to help them make progress, right? So it sounds simple in some ways, but it's basically like people don't want quarter inch drills. They want the whole, the outcome, in a certain situation where that would be useful to them, whether it's hanging a painting in an art gallery or, in my case, you know, punching a hole through the wall to pull some Ethernet cable through that you know no one's ever going to stare at. And if you understand the circumstance and what progress looks like, then you can much more effectively design things that help them accomplish what we call those jobs to be done in their lives. So it's very demand side focus, as we say, it really wants to understand what does progress mean for that individual, and how can we better design experiences to help them unlock that progress. Julian: Picking up on that notion of progress then, in the book, you highlight career progression versus career progress. And so can we? Can we dig in a bit deeper there? Michael: Most people say, well, career progression, I get it. We're moving up the corporate ladder, the career ladder. You start as entry level, you move to mid level, you start to have a team reporting to you, director, right? You sort of we have these frameworks in our mind. But the reality is that as people's lives, as evidenced by the jobs that they do or don't take often and almost never, mirrors these days that career progression right? And it's because we make decisions out of an effort to make progress in our lives for all sorts of reasons, right? You know, sometimes, you know, when I stepped down as the executive director at the Clayton Christensen Institute, it was because I think we've talked about this Julian, you know, I had twins who are one year, and I was like, you know, I want to have a more flexible life. I don't want to have a team reporting to me. I want to be there more on more present. I'm going to step aside from this job on the paper like that didn't make any sense from a career progression point of view, but from a progress in my life perspective, understanding all the forces acting on me, it made perfect sense. And so that's really what we're trying to unpack here is that for some people, yes, they are on the career progression career ladder, and it is synonymous with what progress means to them. But for most of us, and I would say well over 75% of us, our sense of progress is not the same as progression, and progress is really what we call a demand side phenomenon as viewed from the individual employee, whereas progression is viewed from the perspective of org charts and companies and things of that nature. Kaitlin: Yeah, I love that notion of tying back to the job seeker and the individual and their life circumstances, and allowing the room for, as your book outlines, for people to really sit back and say, Wait a minute. So what happened in my last job? Move right? And that reflective component, I think that's a really interesting piece of this book, is like pushing people to really say, well, what, what did I do last time? And why? I'm interested to hear a little bit more about what made you start at that point. Michae: Well so I'll tell you, and I'll give you the actual full origin story, which was in 2009, Clay Christensen said to Ethan Bernstein, you need to come to my class today. There's this guy named Bob who's going to do this thing that you need to come see. So Ethan shows up, not having any idea what he was in for, and he watches Bob do an interview about when someone purchased some random product or service. I don't, I don't know what it was. And basically the interview is about something you've already switched on. And the reason for that is we say, as you know, in the book, we say bitchin ain't switchin. And we complain all the time, but like, we actually want to know when someone makes the big choice to change behavior, to change what you're doing. What were the forces that were acting on them that caused them to make that switch? And so essentially, the interview, it uses criminal forensics techniques, and we basically use it to create a mini documentary of the last time someone switched behaviors in whatever area we're interested in studying. So Ethan watches Bob do this, and he goes, oh my God. I just earlier this morning, was counseling someone who was asking for job advice, career advice in my office, and I had that person in there for like an hour and a half, and I realized when I watched Bob do the interview that my advice was completely worthless because it was completely decoupled from their situation, their struggles, their sense of progress. If I had just interviewed them like Bob, just interviewed someone there, I would have learned so much and could have given so much better advice. And so honestly, that was the origin of the collaboration between Ethan and Bob, and Ethan created an entire class around it, and so as a result of that, we've been able to, as you know, study literally over 1,000 individuals changing jobs to build this data set around why did and it starts with, why did you last change? Really, to unearth those forces, and once you understand how they work in your life, then you can start to pull them forward and recognize the patterns going forward about what might be causing you to seek something new right now. Julian: So just to kind of now, put a little spin on this, given Michael, given that our audience is composed of many of the people who are educating and hiring individuals, what are some of the key concepts that are relevant to them? I mean, I was, you know, we really was struck by the whole concept, for example, that you lay out of like employees hiring their employers. What does that mean for those of us who are hiring and training and educating? Michael: Exactly? And I'm sorry I buried the lead when you asked about the jobs to be done there as well. Because Originally we wanted to call this book, Hire Your Next Job, because the big switch here, right is that we as individuals have agency in our lives, and you actually hire your next job. And the publisher said we hate that title, because no one thinks about the job market that way, and we're like, oh, but you do? You do hire your next job, and this is the big switch we want them to make. And so the big argument in the book, right? For individuals, and I'll get to the employer side in a moment, but for individuals, is if you understand that you actually hire your next job, meaning you choose, do I want to work here for the money that they're going to pay me for the title that they're going to give me for the responsibilities, et cetera, et cetera, right? That's a choice you make. And so yes, employers are hiring you, but you are also hiring your employer and the job you take. And there is a two way street there that we too often don't recognize, and when you do, it empowers you. Now for employers, the implication there is, hey, actually, even though people haven't thought about it this way, if you look at behavior over the last couple decades, it is increasingly clear that more and more people feel empowered to hire their next job because they're leaving, they're quitting, they're changing careers, right? We employers talk about this all the time. We would invest more in our workforce, except they're only here two years, and then they jump to something different, or what if they go to a competitor? Et cetera, et cetera. And so our big argument to employers is we actually have the root causes in our data set of over 1,000 job switchers of what causes them to say, today's the day I'm going to change my job. We know why employees quit in sharper detail, I would argue, than we've ever seen before. And so if you can understand the progress that individuals are making when they decide to hire your job, how do you create a workplace that people want to rehire each and every single day, as measured in their engagement, their productivity, right, their excitement for being in the job. And so out of that, and I will be super honest here, we have three conclusions of what we think this means for employers, of how they can do it differently. And we've really tested the heck out of this in the individual side. We have not tested the heck out of this on the employer side. And so, like, what I hope is employers read it and be like, Those are three good ideas to start, and here's two more. Or here's how I would perfect this, or here's how I would shape it. Because I think there's a world of things. Is my guess that employers would do differently with a real understanding of why people are hiring their companies in the first place, why they are firing them ultimately, and how do we become places that they want to rehire each and every single day? Julian: I think I may be seeing your next book. Michael: Or maybe we'll all collaborate together.  Julian: Sure! Kaitlin: So yeah, I mean thinking we'd love to hear you talk a little bit more about what those recommend, what those preliminary recommendations are, Michael, recognizing that, as you said, maybe they not as well tested, but especially as we're thinking about talent development and retention, and what does it look like to as you said, have employees rehire their jobs every day, and have their jobs kind of shift and mold with them in their lives as they progress. What? What are what you know? What are your preliminary ideas? What are some moves that employers can start to make to respond to that reality? Michael: The first one I would say is, you know, we know what exit interviews are when people it's their last day on the job, but if there's someone you really wanted to retain, an exit interview is way too late. Number one, you can't do anything with the data. Number two, the data is probably false, because no one really wants to be in an exit interview. They just want to get the heck out. So what we say is interview them on the way in about why they hired you. So the interview that I just described, we are trying to teach people and give them a free assessment to jobmoves.com that you can use with all of your employees, that they can actually use to say, Okay, now I understand these are the forces, the pushes and pulls that caused you to say, I want to work here. So that's number one. Let's understand why they're here, and once we do then, if you think about it, every single performance review, every single time we're meeting with management, they can say, hey, I remember that one of the reasons you left your last job and came to work here was because you felt like you were being micromanaged, right, really stifled by your boss. You know, are we falling into that same pattern here? How do we make sure we avoid that? I remember that you really wanted to stretch into these capabilities, you know, develop your management responsibilities or something like that. You know. How are we doing giving you those opportunities? I was mentoring someone the other day, and he said he hired his current employer, because he wanted to do product development that was customer facing, really get out with customers. And two and a half years in, he was only doing product development on internal systems. He was going nuts. Well, if you knew. That on the front end, you know, you wouldn't have lined him up right and made that mistake. So he's looking to leave. So that's number one. Number two. Job descriptions, as you know, have become hopelessly confusing and burdened and meaningless, I would argue, because essentially, the way we create them today is we take the job description of the last time we hired, and then we add all the skills and experiences and things that our competitors have, and then we get around in tables and think about all the other things we could use to filter people out, and we write those in as well. And so you get, like, laundry lists of meaningless job descriptions that by the time you finish it, you have no idea what this person actually does on a day to day basis, or what the real skills at the heart of the job are. To some extent, we're copying, and this is Ethan, because he comes from the HR world and his research at HBS, but you know, he's saying, like, look, these job descriptions, they're probably not going anywhere, because they're essentially legal documents to allow us to hire and fire employees and justify it legally. But if that's the case, let's create shadow job descriptions at the very least, and rather than, like, listing, you know, eight years of experience for an entry level job, good luck with that one or, you know, the bachelor's degree requirement or critical thinking communication, which are like great buzzwords, but I have no idea what they mean in practice in this job. Let's instead just write down what's the day to day and week to week, you know, experiences like in this role, and can I find people who have done the sorts of things that I, you know, want them to do in this job so we can do a better job of finding fit on both sides of the equation, so no one's misled when they when they show up on day one, and it's completely different from what they expected. And then the last thing is number three. When we sort of say the first two things, a lot of chief learning officers, chief human resource officers, they'll say, Well, we know all these things, but stupid managers, they won't do it. And it's because, I think it's asking a lot of managers to sort of remember, oh, the reason someone you know came into this role was they were trying to escape these things and move toward this. And now I have to incorporate it in my meetings and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, like, it's a lot. And so our push is, let's work smarter, not harder, by embedding these things into our actual HR systems. So let's embed the reasons that they left their last job, for example, in the performance management systems. Let's actually understand right on the HR review cycles. Let's have this be part of the form, so that we can say, How are we doing against your goals and your reasons that you hired the company initially, things like that, to really make it systematic, as opposed to ad hoc, hopefully will help us better align, you know, what progress means for an individual with what progress means for a company, because, you know, you got to hit your KPIs too, so that we're all swimming in the same direction. And by the way, if at some point it diverges, we can have a really transparent, upfront conversation about it, as opposed to something that's acrimonious. Because the one thing I know is true is no one will be in a role forever. That's just, that's not the way the world works. That's not the way humans work, and we will never be in a role forever. So let's just acknowledge that up front, stop making it something taboo, and have much more transparent, open conversations with each other. Julian: So Michael, going back for a moment to the to the individuals who are seeking employer here their next job, many of our listeners are particularly focused on low income, first generation, you know, college students, people who may be new to this culture, if it's we're talking about the US and just just wondering, you know, and process that you describe in Job Works is very reflective. I mean, it's takes a lot of sort of soul searching, and it's very holistic, and, you know, and what about folks who are maybe hard pressed, you know, and racing from activity to activity, just trying to get through the day or paycheck to paycheck? Does it apply? Have you looked at these folks? Have you thought about how this might work? Michael: I'm so glad you asked the question. So a lot of the research was actually on frontline employees and people in blue collar jobs. So we know that the process works with them. That said, You're right, the biggest thing that they face is time poverty. How do you carve out the time? I will be super honest, in my view, it's more about finding the right next step for someone, as opposed to you have to do all nine steps. And so what I mean by that is, I think there's a bit of a choose your own adventure when I when I'm counseling someone, and I'm probably on the phone, you know, once a week with someone who's looking for career advice, I try to listen to where they are, understand what their questions are, and then I try to give them the one. One Step or maybe two, that I think will really unlock progress at this point. And so I think that's number one is, if you're, you know, working with someone who's low income or has multiple jobs and is just, you know, trying to make ends meet, what's the leverage point you can, you know, you can use at the right time to help them unlock progress and get a deeper sense of what they're trying to achieve. And that's the last chapter of the book. Is like, pay it forward for mentors, right? And so I hope that's helpful. Is like, and I don't know if it's shared with all my co authors, but my own belief is, like, you don't have to do all nine. It's like, find the right one for you at the time. Some people, I think, are so consumed by just sort of, they're on the hamster wheel, right of job to job, and sort of thinking, Oh, it's about boosting pay and so forth. And what you realize, if you step back from it is, if you're not energized in your job, you're not going to do a great job, which means you're never going to get that promotion to get more money. To me, in that situation, like the most impactful thing you can do from our process is look back at your past roles and just figure out, like, what what drives your energy and what drains it, so you can get a clearer sense of like, oh, I should avoid, you know, even though it's like, you know, pays $1 an hour more, I realized from my past moves that like, I'm gonna stop showing up to work, or I'm gonna quit after two months, because it doesn't align with what gives me energy. So that can be, like, a huge boost, right? Because now I get, as you know, again, job seeker of limited time. This actually doesn't take a lot of time. It's like, over the course of two weeks. Anytime you think about, oh man, another meeting with blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I remember that sucked in my last job to write it down. And by the end, you have, like, a collection of, like, very small insights that add up to something really big. And you can say, oh, wow, I really hate it when I have to be in ad hoc meetings without knowing in advance that it's going to show you know, again, I'm making it up. But you know, some people who are in shift work, for example, some of them maybe don't mind getting called to the manager, you know, on an ad hoc meeting with no notice, right? Because you get to pow wow with friends. Others, it's like the worst thing in the world, because I had lined up childcare in the following way, and it was dependent on me being home at such and such time, and now you just blew up my entire schedule. What the heck do I do? And so I, you know, that's something I think that can really give you a lot of insight into what does and doesn't work for you, to make sure I'm not going to take a job that that, that, you know, makes me do that thing. And yes, there's going to be other trade offs I do make, but like, I'm going to optimize around these one, two or three things that really are important to me. Kaitlin:It's really helpful to hear how you think about, you know, which kind of which one, which steps do you need most imminently, and being able to build from those steps, you know, proactively, without necessarily needing to follow all nine. So following up on that idea, and you're already giving us so many kind of practical steps through what you've outlined, but I would like to give you the chance, given that our podcast name is Work Forces, I'd like to give the chance to we're going to specifically ask this question about being forces in this effort and around how can education and business leaders develop better strategies for supporting employee growth and development, and you've already said so much. But if there's anything else you'd like to add, I wanted to throw that question out to you. Michael: I appreciate it. Well, I'll say on the educator side, I think number one, I actually think you can embed the nine steps into your programs. It'd be an amazing way not just to revamp Career Services. Frankly, but also a really clever way. I think you know talking to the people who did this when Southern New Hampshire University, like a project based College for America, right curriculum? How do you make sure that we're prototyping work before you actually take the job? Because that's also one of the big things of the book is like, how do you learn before switching rather than after you've switched? Because by the time you've switched too late, you know you're in a bad situation. If I can learn before switching. And so I think coupling some of the insights with the book with real work based learning for educators could be incredibly powerful, and I hope to see that for employers again. I mean, I think we have the three steps, but I think probably the bigger thing is, you know, as a manager, as a mentor, as someone seeking to guide those on your team, how do you have that? Right? You know, I see the struggle you're having. Let's have the right conversation at the right time. Rather than trying to overload your working memory with like the, well, you have to do an interview about the last time you switched jobs. Otherwise, we can't have the conversation about the no, right? Like that may be what's required, but it often won't be. So it's like, oh, you know, the big thing is, you don't know, you know Julian, how to pitch your career story in 30 seconds. Let's teach you how to tell your career story. That's the value add you need right now, really, using the process as a way to shape your conversations. Because, again, personal experience, but also, you know, a lot of people talk about this, most of us give really lousy job advice for the most part when we're asked. And we hope this gives you a template for how to do it better. Julian: Yeah, it's so great to hear you lay that out. And it's funny, because so much of what you know, this podcast and Kaitlin's and my work is about, is making switches. And so, I mean, even as you were talking, yeah, jobs, but this is a conversation that switches the way we think about learning. That switches the way we think about how we spend our free time. I mean, it's just, it's a we've got to get to a better place. Michael: Actually, can I bend your ear both on that for one second? Because it's, it's sort of my view that we are talking a lot, as you know, about skills based hiring, both in work and higher ed. But I think what we mean by that all of us have very different conceptions of it right now. And my own view through writing this book is like, if we think it's going to be some sort of technocratic exercise where, like, I have an assessment that defines critical thinking and like, and somehow I fit these. It's not going to happen, because employers have no idea what the skills are called at the heart of their successful employees, nor should they, and we don't know how to do those stuff. But what we do know how to do is like, oh, you know, in this job, this is somewhat, this is a task, or this is an experience, something you know, someone does many times. Okay, so in the education, how do I build opportunities for someone to be able to do that over the course of their educational career? And then, you know from that, oh, I see I actually have to build your skill or knowledge in this thing, so I'm going to have some direct instruction, you know, around this thing, to build you up to doing this project or work based thing. And I think if we we can migrate if it's almost experience based hiring as opposed to skills based, again, it's, I mean, it's, I'm sort of bashful, because you guys kind of built this, but like, I think we can unlock a lot of this realignment that we want to see, and between work and higher education in ways that I think right now are a bit of a mystery to folks, and we're all trying to build taxonomies and languages, and I just don't think it's going to work. Julian: Yeah, and I think, and that's why Job moves is so of such great interest to us, and so exciting, because you're beginning to break it down, like, how do you practically take these steps? And I love that. It's a bit of a pick what works for you, whether your co authors agree or not. It seems very practical. I mean, for me, it's almost like an update of what I did when I read, What Color Is Your Parachute I, you know, I way too add to understand the whole thing, but I zeroed in on what is that I love to do, that I do best, and that's kind of guided my career. And every decision I've made, very simple but very profound, Michael: 100%. And I think I mean, our hope is this is honestly the 21st century refresh of What Color Is Your Parachute is sort of the thing that I've had in my mind. It's much shorter than what color is your parachute and to your point, it's okay if you don't get every nine, all nine steps right, like, it's okay if the petal flower and what color is your shoot parachute exercise doesn't work for you. It's like getting the right leverage at the right time for you. Kaitlin: Yeah absolutely. And I would circle back on your other point around, you know, I think this concept of experiential or scenario based hiring, I mean, I think it rings so true, especially in light of the fact that so many job,. I mean, any job is inherently multidisciplinary, multi skilled, right? You can't say, Okay, well, if you have skills in this one area, then yes, you'll be successful. It's if you take on this situation, right? What skills are you pulling on in order to be successful? And so that really, that that rings true to me, as especially as we see, you know, the emergence of different types of technology that can support some of our work. And what are the skills that are becoming more and more essential as as you know, AI and other tech forms kind of take shape and have increasing influence. Michael: 1000%. And really quickly off that, like, if the rate of change of what work is accelerates, our only way to keep up to it is not to codify it in some overly technocratic way, but to give people actual experiences using the AI and things like that to keep up with it. And I think then the answer to folks who say, Well, you know, people from privileged or upper income backgrounds, they're going to have more chances to get those experiences true, which is why I think education has such an important role to play here, because you can actually embed this into your program so the low income students are not left behind in this era. Kaitlin: Absolutely. So Michael, as we wind down this conversation today. I mean, I feel like we could, we could continue to speak about this for much more time, but given that we're winding down, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Michael: Yeah, absolutely. Well, if you want to check out more about the book, it's at jobmoves.com. It's got a free chapter there, the intro, as well as the assessment I talked about and some other tools and ways to purchase the book. And then if you want to follow me, I'm on all the social networks. At MichaelBHorn, whether that's X or LinkedIn or even Instagram, I'm not on Tik Tok. But then you can always follow me at Michael B Horn on sub stack at the future of education or my website, michaelbehorn.com Julian: Thank you so much, Michael for taking this time. It's always so great to talk with you, and it's kind of an update and a very important one, I think, and can't wait for this to get out there to the world. Michael: Appreciate you both. Thank you. Kaitlin: Thank you. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We are also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please Subscribe, Like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.

Matt Merino, CEO of Education Management Solutions (EMS), speaks about the innovative ways technology can be used to address talent gaps. Matt discusses the challenges and opportunities of leveraging technology to improve training, onboarding, and ongoing development for healthcare professionals. While Matt's focus is healthcare, his insights on leveraging technology to innovate and scale learning solutions offer valuable takeaways for leaders across all industries. He also shares his perspective on the importance of continuous evaluation and the need to start developing talent pipelines earlier on in a learner's journey. Tune in to learn more about how technology can be used to create a more efficient and effective healthcare system. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  Julian: One of the themes that keeps coming up on the podcast and in our consulting work is the need to pair work experience with learning.  Kaitlin: That's right, Julian, there are many innovative approaches emerging to address industry skill and hiring gaps, whether through apprenticeships, work and learn models or tech enabled simulations. We're excited to have a guest on the podcast today who is a leading expert in these tech enabled options with a focus on healthcare.  Julian: Absolutely, healthcare is a particularly ripe topic for discussion, given the challenges of regulation and providing hands on clinical experience. And so to introduce today's guest, Matt Marino is CEO of education management solutions, or EMS. Prior to his role at EMS, Matt served as the chief experience officer at Orbis Education, a program development and management company working with universities and healthcare systems to expand educational programs in nursing and therapies. During his many years in higher education, Matt led teams involved with the initial launch of online and hybrid programs for Arizona State University Online, the University of Miami, George Washington University, and Southern New Hampshire University. And before his career in higher education, Matt was a member of the United States Army Special Operations community, serving in over a dozen different countries. During his time in service, he was ordered over a dozen medals, including the Bronze Star in 2004. Thank you for joining us on the podcast today. Matt. Matt Merino: Thanks for having me, and thank you for that extended introduction. I appreciate it. It makes me uh, reminds myself just how mature I'm getting. So I appreciate it.  Julian: Oh, and we had to edit that one down so you have even more to tell. Kaitlin: Indeed with that being said, Matt, we did give that bio, but please, we'd like to hear a little bit more in your own words about what led you to education management solutions and more about your background.  Matt: Thanks for having me once again. For me, Education Management Solutions (EMS) is just another continuation on the path of what I've tried to do throughout my my career, and that's finding places that I believe can have impact on what I consider to be critical issues that affect people, regardless of things like socio economic status or location or race. Something that that has mass impact to all of us. So with EMS, this was just another opportunity to step into an organization that I thought had incredible potential to really drive at some of the deepest challenges we face and what is the most, in my view, indiscriminatory fact of life, and that is our health and our end of life at some point. So that's what brought me here. I've always lived in the higher ed world just because, uh, it speaks to me from a purpose standpoint. I came from a family of educators. I realized at a very young age that I was never going to have the patience required to be an educator myself. So next best up, let's, let's find a way to work in industries that can assist educators or assist workforce and people moving forward with their lives.  Julian: So what are the problems that EMS is addressing, Matt.  Matt: The problems that we face, that we're really going after now are trying to leverage technology solutions to assist with what I consider the big challenges we're facing in healthcare. One is we just don't have enough people. These shortages in critical roles are really a combination of two things. It's how many, obviously, clinicians are being able to be produced. But we're just in a situation where we have an aging population, demands in health care, and the needs in health care continue to go up. So we have a shortage of people. We have more people needing care. Solving it with a purely a people perspective, that's a long term solution. It takes time for the education process, through certification, being able to get all the way through and being able to work in an actual clinical setting. I do believe that what we're doing is we're trying to attack the shortage, the onboarding and then the delivery of care in a way that we're trying to do it on a continuum with not only higher education, but directly with providers. But we're trying to give them technology solutions that allow for the most rapid onboarding for new clinicians, gets them at the top of practice, and makes it so that they really do have tools that can take away anything that isn't working with patients directly. Is probably the best way to say it.  Julian: So tell us a little bit about the tools that you've developed at EMS and how they work and exactly which level of clinicians are you targeting.  Matt: Yeah. So very interesting. You know, our roots started in the world of simulation solutions for nursing schools, medical schools helping to to train doctors and nurses using those simulation capabilities that are all been used either to replace clinical experience or prep for clinical experience. So that's the roots of the organization. We see simulation has moved absolutely into the provider space, and is gaining traction there right now. On our end, though, something we were really excited about in the past year introducing was two other pieces to this, and the first one was taking all of that simulation, which traditionally has been done in a very large facility with dedicated real estate and rooms, so a high capital expense, in creating those same capabilities in a mobile solution that can be wheeled around in a 25 pound case as a way to not only reduce the cost, but reduce the requirement related to space needed and whatnot. The second thing we did is we've invested heavily in competency, education, management and tracking, which is really related to how do doctors, it goes all the way down to medical assisting. It can be used for technologists, anyone who works in a clinical capacity in the workforce. This is designed so that organizations can have a way to not only evaluate where their clinical competencies are for their specific role, and that role could be the same job title, perhaps, of nurse, but they could work in one of 30 specialty areas. So really knowing where their competencies fit based on what's required for the role they're in, and most importantly along the way, is instead of trying to do a one size fits all for training and developing clinicians throughout their time with an organization, the tool gives the insight, the calculations, the data, the visibility, so that they can now plan out more of a custom and more efficient and effective ongoing clinical training model within the systems. It helps with standardization. It also helps with just a broad overview. So when those times come and you see this all the time, where they've got to flip different clinicians to fill in for different shifts in different areas, who's best suited for that, so that the quality of care remains right where the expectation.  Kaitlin: So Matt, as you're talking about these different solutions, it sounds like they're very focused on the end user being the learner. Is there also a side of this that focuses on the needs of HR teams? Or how? What is the link there?  Matt: Yeah, so, so one of the things that we're really focused on with this, and it's a great point, is visibility all the way throughout an organization. So there is the HR component. And oftentimes what we see in the clinical setting is that we'll integrate an HRIS into the system, since ours is strictly focused on clinical skills. But what it does do, it has all these different permissions sets so an administrator could see the entire system, and perhaps someone working just at, let's say, one hospital in a set of 30, could see just their hospital, maybe a floor manager can see just their floor, and a shift manager may just be able to see that shift. So we're going to give views all the way through, to give all the business intelligence that's needed for the organization, regardless of level. And you know, the other side of it that we do that I think, is really important. It gets overlooked a lot of times. I am an eternal optimist, believing that whatever people choose to do with their career, they want to be good at it. They want to be successful. So the learner or clinician, in this case, can see where they're at based on expectation, and it can even give a plan of here's areas to focus on, and recommendations on what could be done next. You know so often times when, when we're going through evaluations or being evaluated, the most important piece that sometimes gets the least amount of attention is just that I have the awareness of where I'm at and what could be done next, as opposed to, oh, well, here's your final report, and you're deficient here, here and here. If I can see that ongoing and see improvement over time, that's really what we're chasing for, for the individual user, to be able to see.  Kaitlin: Matt, you know, I think we, having spent a number of years designing competency based education, I'm curious to know when we, when you're talking about competencies, who's defining them? Are they coming as like predefined in your system? Are you working with individual employers to define those, to define competencies? What's your process?  Matt: I love that question because it's really important. So I think of competencies right as kind of the end all be up at the roll up of a bunch of different things. And what that leads to is that you often we'll see the same title used for a competency, but what our partner organizations feel makes up all of those sub competencies and skills that roll up into it there is variance between them. So oftentimes, we will come with a framework that says, here are some of the examples of what we've seen from like organizations, without giving away who they are. But I think what our partners appreciate is the flexibility, because even sometimes with the same competencies, not only are there different areas that roll up into them depending on who you're working with, but there's different value based on them. So you will see a different value, and we don't want to make it so that each competency is weighted the same. We want to give you the ability to be flexible with that, because we do understand that, you know, we could have a world where someone needs has 15 different competencies that they need to be successful at, or they want to measure or be considered knowledgeable, and that doesn't mean that all 15 of those carry the same value or the same weight from the organizational perspective. So we try to give that flexibility in the system. Kaitlin; Really interesting. And I feel, yes: It's like, depending on what role you're in, depending on where you're being employed, exactly the emphasis on those skills might be different. So I appreciate there's like, a level of variability within the different competencies as you're talking about, I guess, like how they roll up. I appreciate that.  Matt: In a perfect world for us, right? We'd live in a world where everyone valued in every Health Core organization the exact same skill and competency in the same way. But that's never going to be the case. So as opposed for our viewpoint, instead of trying to force someone into, quote, unquote, our ideal. Let's listen to them and see what they consider the ideal for their organization and help them get there.  Julian: Matt, at this stage, what are the what are the greatest challenges you see with taking this, this work, to scale?  Matt: Boy, I think there's a lot of challenges right now. I think the first one is when you're working in an area that has so many pressures on it. And I would say healthcare is absolutely that there is pressure coming from all different angles right now. Sometimes you're just battling to get through the next week, the next month, the next quarter. And really where, where this is focused on is a long term solution that you'll see impacts, but the impacts just get greater and greater with the solution, the longer you're using it. So it's not a magic bullet. And sometimes when organizations are struggling, they're looking for magic bullets. I'd say there's one. I think that it is a mindset also that no different than other areas in workforce that we have to get to that, and it's hard to admit, for some people, is that we all get educated. And I learned it. I was excellent at it. I have that skill now, but over time, if you don't use it all the time, it starts to degrade a little bit and like, if we would put a third year business calculus problem in front of me right now, I'm pretty sure I couldn't answer one of them, but, you know, 25 years ago, I was pretty good at doing those types of things. So I think having that mindset of continuous not only improvement, but continuous evaluation, so that it can't be an event, right? How we evaluate people shouldn't be an event. It should be just part of what we do every day. So there, and I think that also is a bit of a mindset shift in an environment in any industry that has regulation and whatnot, it's documentation. We're going through this regulatory event, and we're done, and now we're done with this, and let's move on. I really think we have to get to a world where we quit thinking of things and events and just thinking of as things we do all the time. And the final thing that we have to really do is that we have to understand that in these very specific verticals like healthcare, you have brilliant minds that are there to be clinicians. They're not there to be technologists. They're not there to be people that come from other areas, and this is something we work on. We do this. We're not just there to sell people the solution and walk away. You've got to give them resource to help it get set up and educated. Because the term competency in itself has been–had liberties taken against it over the past few years, to say the least. So I think there's an education at standpoint of what really is competency, because it goes way beyond just doing a checklist and looking at skills. So I think you've got to provide resource and education and partnership with these organizations as you get them on the path. Kaitlin: Well, right? And then it's interesting to think about the complexities of implementation of these tools, right? So then it's not just about, oh, here's your tech tool. Implement it, it. There's so much more there.  Matt: I think so many have lived through that, right? Like they've lived through the world of someone's going to come in and they're going to sell me this and and they'll show you what the end product looks like, and you're like, Oh, this is amazing, but there's a bunch we have to do along the way. So when we do it, we don't really sell it as per se or offer it as and here's a piece of software that'll do this. It's more of, yes, it's going to be a piece of software, but let's work with you, with some of our resource our experts who have done this, to help you get everything organized how, and then we can build off that as we go, and then get it to the point over the first six months where then we really, as we're sitting right next to you, putting the system together, we're training you how to maintain it yourself. So so it's a bit different approach from that aspect, and a lot of technology organizations go but that's why I like the word a technology solution, and not just software. Kaitlin: Right. It's a higher touch model where your focus much higher touch. So, Matt, just to drive us to the concrete for a second. Could you give us an example or two of like, when you mentioned, you know, the mobile solution for a simulation like, what are some of the content areas like that are addressed, like, can you give us an example?  Matt: So, so there's many healthcare organizations that have annual trainings that are required for clinicians, and if you're a large organization, or let's, let's take a large healthcare system that maybe has 180 different clinical environments, and those can be hospitals, maybe clinics, but everyone has to go through this training. Well, they have a couple options. One older model that's still heavily in use is, let's bring everybody to one place and train them, or send trainers around location by location to do it. The old satellite model that's incredibly expensive and time consuming. Another model has been that we've all seen in my military days. Saw this all the time, the train, the trainer. So let's take a group that we're going to turn into to people who's going to deliver this block of instruction. Let's bring them one place get that, and then let's send them out there to all the different locations. And we know there's individuals, there's changes that goes on, and the consistency sometimes lacks there. So that is an exact use case we were dealing with, without revealing my partner's name, 180 locations, trying to figure out, how are we going to deliver consistent training? So they took our mobile solution being able to put those at the sites. It goes beyond just being able to observe the training, because it is integrated with team and Zoom, or WebEx or whatever your preferred methodology is, so you can have synchronous, one person, delivering, evaluating a time. But it also comes loaded with these mobile solutions with a tablet with our software on it that allows you to record it. It allows you to make annotations while you're doing it. It allows you to set up checklists ahead of time so that you can have a consistent evaluation and you can debrief it, which is very popular, where people are going to record it, then afterwards they're going to watch it together and go through here's what went well. Here were the opportunities and more that it can be saved and then automated and rolled up into one system. So that's where it becomes different, that instead of people having to transfer data or enter it one by one. Once that's stored and saved, it can go right into to the bigger system. So it creates an efficiency with managing it. So there's an example on the on the mobile training side, right?  Kaitlin: So it sounds like it both decreases the concerns around variability and also allows for maybe more responsiveness as training needs change and evolve.  Matt: I would say, not only responsiveness, accuracy, which I think is a huge challenge right now, every organization struggles with that is, if you're a large organization, consistency and evaluation of the training and development you're delivering. That's a tough area.  Julian: Building on that comment, Matt, you know, so that your company is currently focused on innovation and healthcare space, but, and while we have many listeners in and interested in that space, what, what practical steps can our can the audience take to become forces in leveraging, you know, technology to address talent gaps in in other industries Matt: Yeah, I think there's, I think there's a few. I think the first one is, and this is the hardest one is sometimes is not to be scared of the tech, if that makes sense, because it changes rapidly. It moves rapidly, and when I say not be scared of it, understand. It that what's out there is learnable. I think, over the past, call it 12 to 18 months, we've all been bombarded with the nebulous term of AI, thinking that AI is going to solve everything for us with a wave of wand, but it's not. It's a great tool to use as assisting but it's not a replacement tool. So I think that, no matter where you're at, you can't be afraid of the technology. I think number two, it goes to that mindset of, I should look at technology solutions as a way to take the repetitive or the mundane or something that doesn't require my skill set to do. And that's where I should find my technical solutions, and the stuff that does require that thought, that expertise that I bring to the table or my organization does, that's not what we're going to try to wipe out with tech, nor should we. And then I think the final thing is understanding I mentioned this earlier. There's no magic bullet. Nothing solves it overnight. You have to think of it as a continuum of what are the areas that I have those opportunities to bring technology into? And it doesn't mean that day one I flip the switch and it's doing all of it, but having a longer term strategic vision of where are the areas that I would if I could say tomorrow, we don't have to spend 10% of our time doing that, well, there's where I think you have to develop more of a longer term view of how do we get to that place, using some tech enabled resource.  Kaitlin: I'm curious to talk a little bit more I think about the not being scared of the tech, because I feel like there's this balancing act right of Sure, not being scared, but also recognizing Technology is everywhere, and what does it look like to successfully integrate these tools or or, or determine which ones to use. Like, it just, I think that is, it feels like that's a big challenge for so, for so many people right now, is just like, Okay, well, you know, we know there's so much out there, like we have to use, we want to use it all, or we have to start, you know, we have to integrate the newest thing. And so it's not even necessarily, there's the fear piece. There's also the excitement. And it's like, how do you think about this technology in a strategic way, recognizing that maybe you know you want to seize the moment and get the next best thing that's out there?  Matt: Yeah, I think that. Look, if nothing else, most technology companies are really tremendous marketing tools. But I'll say this, so there's another side of the equation. So yes, you should be excited. Yes, we can't be afraid of it. Yes, we have to have a plan to know what we want to take on. But then there's the other side. The other side is, what are our capacities, internal capabilities and skill sets and resources we have? Right? Because if you try to do everything at once on limited resources, nothing works. So I think there's the first step. It's saying, okay, what are the first things that we what does our internal resource looks like, and what's our internal capability look like? I think it's really important when you're picking technology solutions, that you have to have the right people at the table. So yes, there's always, you always got to have your people from your technology group and understand the security and how it integrates into other tools and whatnot. But I always want the end users in the room when we're having these discussions, because if the people who are going to be using it aren't comfortable, or it's not user friendly enough, or they don't see the value in it, none of this matters. And we've, I bet all of us have worked at an organization at least once in our lives, where there was this really flashy tool introduced that did something and no one really ever did anything with it. So that's kind of my viewpoint is, if you have the people who it is meant to impact giving their direct feedback, and they may say, look, we'd love to use it, but this looks really complex. I don't know if we can Okay, then we probably need to find something else. Or if they say, yeah, it's easy to use, but I don't know how it helps us. Well, that's probably not the answer either. So I think it's that internal view that so many organizations miss, because when talking with technology companies, and look, I'm one of them. I can look at it and say, yes, this is exactly how we could impact your organization. But I think it's important we take a step back and say, but we need to first of all give you a realistic view of what that lift looks like. And let's talk about the resource you have in your end users to make sure that it's hitting your need. Kaitlin: And making sure, like you said, it's staff from the purchaser's end, right? Like that, in the end of the day, well supported. On, on, I know you have a high touch model, but also making sure the staff is there to support the tool.  Matt: But in the end, right? No organization wants to be reliant on an outside organization to run internal things they consider critical to the foundation of what they do, right? Like they want to have a tool that they've got assistance with, getting it up and running, working with the solution, but then they want to be able to handle it on their own. And quite honestly, that's what we want for them, too. So I think having those conversations and not just hey, someday, it's putting time flights and timestamps on things. And I think you have to do that when working with another organization, internally in your organization, you have to say, we're going to make this investment. And that's what it is, an investment now, well, 90 days we need to be here, and in 120 days we need to be here. 180 days we got to be at this point of usage of these said solutions. So I think it takes some really specific conversation.  Julian: It makes me wonder about opportunities that you see in the future.  Matt: Boy, you know, the thing about the opportunities of the future are for me, I look at it and say, I have a high level of confidence that in talking strictly in healthcare right now, but this applies to most verticals. I think that have a specialized form of education, training, whatever it may be. Most of the time, people who enter verticals such as these, a they know this is what they want to do. It's not so much. I'm trying to find a way to make more money, or most people who are going to work in the health professions, I always feel it's more of a calling. More of a calling for them than a job, per se. I'd say that number two, we know how much intense pressure is on our health care professionals right now, and both those things I just said could come across as really negative, but that's what I think leads to the opportunities of the future, is that right now, we haven't given those tools fully to those professionals, and when we do over time, as we have better prepared clinicians, better ongoing, skilled clinicians that are being utilized to do what they're there for and not doing mundane other work, taking time away, it's going to lead to elevated care, and it's going to lead to better outcomes, and that's a world that we can get to,  and I think we have to have a we have to change our mindset of the future, of the possibility where we can't wait till things devolve into a crisis before we do something about that, which tends to be how we function. It seems lately is that we wait for something to be an absolute crisis, and then we try to figure out a plan. The good thing is, we still know, I don't want to call it a crisis yet, it's extreme strain, but we know it's coming, so we have time to do something about it. That means we should be in the educational phase. We should be working with people at younger ages to identify who potentially would want to work in healthcare. And if, and I've seen some really interesting things going on, where you see these high school academies getting built in partnership with healthcare organizations to actually build out a healthcare focused education, focused secondary education, which I think is really smart, right? So for not waiting till someone's a senior to have an experience or working in the summer, all four years of high school, they are integrating and weaving healthcare education into every subject. And I think that's where we've got to start thinking about every field of need, of profession in this country, is we've got to start younger and younger with getting people involved in it. And it doesn't mean with it, people need to decide by the time they're 10 years old whether this is what I'm going to be but when we know that there is that interest in that drive, the best way to foster and encourage it is to do it at a younger and younger. Kaitlin: I think that's a theme we're seeing time and again, as you're saying across industries, Matt, that the need to start to build this pipeline earlier and just an honest and build the pipeline. But also, as you're saying, just make everyone aware, right? When we say, when we talk about jobs in healthcare, here's what they are, and here are the skills you use, and here's what a day looks like, right? I think more and more there's the need to build that in to secondary learning experiences, so that people know that kids know, like, here are the options available. And especially we're talking about changes in tech around implementation of tools. But changes in tech really do impact these jobs as well. And so what it looks like to be in a lot of these roles is really different than 10, 20 years ago.  Matt: You're absolutely right, and I think it'll change even more in the next 10 or 20 years. You know, as an interesting conference a few weeks ago talking about healthcare, and one of the questions posed was, and certain professional roles, or clinic clinical roles. Are those skills going to have to be redefined, or those competencies gonna have to be redefined over the next decade as the the world of work changes with the technology involved with it, I think it's a fair discussion, but once again, we need to have the discussion, and we need to be thinking about it before it's on top of us. Kaitlin: 100% so with that being said, and with us talking about future opportunities, how can our listeners continue to follow the work you're doing and learn more about your work. Matt: Easiest place to follow us is at ems-works.com. Can also follow us on normal social media. Pick your your favorite social media, Instagram, X, LinkedIn, whatever it is. And we will continue to do what we like to do. You know, we are, we are focused on that whole idea of, how are we going to give people the tools they need to be successful at what they want to do? And we're going to have some exciting stuff coming up here in the next three or four months of new announcements of additional technology we're putting into this space so you can follow us there and and hopefully it keeps everyone informed, and hopefully more p Julian: Well, thank you so much, Matt. It's been a great conversation, and we so appreciate your time, and I'm ready to save your site and keep checking in to follow your progress.  Matt: Well, I really appreciate you having me. Really enjoyed the conversation and appreciate the work you're doing and putting some light on a really needed aspect of the world that we are in, and the world, more importantly that we are going to be. Kaitlin: Thank you so much, Matt for taking the time. Thanks so much. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify, please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Pardis Mahdavi, a professor of medical anthropology, founder of Entheon Journeys, and former university president, discusses how higher education can evolve to meet modern workforce demands through technological innovation and cultural transformation. She examines the growing disconnect between student needs and traditional higher education approaches, emphasizing how educational technology can enhance learning outcomes and promote equity. Mahdavi draws from her extensive leadership experience across diverse institutions to outline practical strategies for creating sustainable innovation in higher education. She argues that embracing technological enhancement in education is crucial for maintaining higher education's relevance, supporting social mobility, and strengthening democracy. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  Julian: It feels like the last few weeks have been a whirlwind of activity between the kickoff of a new academic year coupled with our own rebranding Kaitlin.  Kaitlin: Oh, I know it Julian, there's been so much activity, and it's exciting to see our podcast and consulting efforts now housed under the Work Forces umbrella. There are so many overlapping themes across our podcast discussions and consulting work that it really just feels right to have everything live in one place. One theme that has emerged over time, and really it's come up time and again, is how higher education keeps pace and remains agile in a fast moving, ever changing economic landscape. So I'm looking forward to our discussion today to dig deeper on this topic.  Julian: I'm thrilled to return to the topic of higher ed, and today we have a higher ed leader who is at the forefront of innovation, Pardis Mahdavi is a professor of anthropology at the University of La Verne. Prior to this role, she served as president at the University of La Verne, provost and executive vice president at the University of Montana, as well as dean at Arizona State University and the University of Denver, after serving in multiple roles at Pomona College. Her research interests include gendered labor, human trafficking, migration, human rights, and public health in the context of changing global and political structures, and she's a widely published author. Pardis is a lifetime member of the Council on Foreign Relations and Young Presidents Organization, and has been a fellow at the Social Sciences Research Council, the American Council on Learned Societies, Google Ideas and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. She also serves as a board member for the Lumina Foundation, our sponsor, and the Human Trafficking Legal Center. Welcome to Work Forces. Pardis. Pardis Mahdavi: Thank you so much for having me on the podcast. I am thrilled and honored to be here today.  Kaitlin: Well, we're thrilled you could join us, and so as we get started today, Pardis, we'd love to learn more about your background and the story of your career path in higher education. Pardis: You know, interestingly enough, my story actually starts when I was a pretty young girl. I'm Iranian-American, as my name suggests, and my parents came here during the revolution. I was initially born. I'm a child of the Revolution, so maybe I'm dating myself, but I was born here. My parents, you know, they came here during the Revolution. So I was born here in Minnesota, and we lived in Minnesota until I was about six years old. And one day I came home from school and there was a sign posted in front of my house, and it said, "Burn this house. Terrorists live here," which, of course, my Iranian-American mind, my six year old mind, could not get my head around. I thought, you know, my dad is a doctor. My mom is a health provider. We are, you know, and but it would this was, you know, Minnesota and, you know, during Iran, you know, or On contrary, on hostage crisis. And so really, growing up at a time of antipathy towards Iranians, right in this country. And so my father made the very difficult decision to pack everything up once again and move from Minnesota to California. But my father said something to me in that move, and that's really what drives me, you know, in higher ed he said, "you know," Pardis, "people can take everything from you, they can take your belongings, they can take your home, they can even take your country, but the one thing nobody can ever take from you is your education." And that's really what drove me to understand the value of access to education, because no matter where you go, it was having that education that always opened up doors and opportunities. And, you know, for an immigrant family to be able to do all the things that we were able to do, it was education that allowed us to do that. And so that really propelled me to want to be, you know, part of making sure that everybody can access what can never be taken away from them. So that was really sort of my journey into higher education. School became my job. And I really, you know, it propelled me to becoming, you know, a leader in higher education, because I saw, you know, the value, the power and the importance of being able to access higher education. I also understood the role of education in upholding and supporting democracy. You know, coming from a place like Iran, I actually went back, you know, between 2002 and 2007. I taught there, and really felt the weight of trying to be a part of higher ed in a place which is so heavily regulated. I thought, gosh, you know, there's so much we take for granted in this country and the power of American higher education in upholding democracy is one that we can't lose. And so, you know, over my career trajectory, I watched as the perception of higher education for Americans has gone down. You know, as we sit here today, more than half of Americans believe college is not a good use of time. And you know, we're facing the possibility that for the first time in American history, the generation that's coming up, my kids, generation will be less educated than the generations that came before it. That is not a trend that we're bucking in the right direction. That, to me, is a national security crisis, a crisis of democracy that keeps me up at night. And so really, what I've always wanted to do is figure out ways of making higher education better and being able to both meet the needs of students and meet the needs of the democracy which you know, of which workforce is a huge part of all of that.  Julian: So in your journey in higher ed, in addition to, you know, per your very impressive resume, you've, you've worked with many different kinds of higher ed institutions, and I guess I'm really interested in understanding, you know, kind of your take on the state of higher ed With respect to that national security and democracy and workforce development issue. And then segue to really, what is the problem that you are now looking to solve for as you've stepped away from being a higher ed president?  Pardis: Yeah, I think that's a great question. I think for a long time, you know, the conversation Higher Ed was about access, right? It was, how can we get as many people to be able to access as possible? And then we talked a lot about attainment. How can we make sure people are finishing, that they're not stopping out, you know? And now we're talking a lot about narrating the importance and the value of higher education. And I think one of the things I've observed, and as you mentioned, I've been at top 10 small liberal arts college. I've been at America's largest university, ASU. I've been at the land grant, Montana. I was president of a Hispanic Serving Institution, private in Los Angeles. And one of the common themes I see is that there is this absolute disconnect between what students are demanding from the higher education experience, right? So you've got students saying, hey, you know, we want to be trained with, you know, technologically enhanced learning coming out of the pandemic. We see students are more risk averse than ever before. We see that lecture is dead, no more chalk and talk. And we see students asking for engaged and experiential learning, very clearly, asking for these things and saying, help us connect the dots. Help us to develop. You know, we're working so hard developing that pipeline from K 12 into college. Now we've got to help develop that pipeline, connecting those dots from college to career, right? What does that look like, and how do you start to render that legible? Not to say that there isn't a role for liberal arts, but it's, it's a larger picture. And students are asking for, you know, legibility. They're asking for curricula that have both horizontality and verticality to it. They're very clear on what they're asking for. And on the other end, workforce is very clear on what they're asking for, right? They're asking for students who are able to be critical thinkers, problem solvers, effective communicators, having certain skills. And yet you've got kind of higher ed sitting right here, not necessarily making the changes or being responsive to the needs of, you know, and again, we wouldn't ever narrate students as customers, but, but to the needs of the people who were trying to serve. We're trying to serve students, and we're trying to serve the democracy. And so the question is, how can we best do that? We've seen in the last decade or more, the emergence of Ed Tech as a field, right? Educational Technologies, technologically enhanced learning things like virtual reality, we know that they are incredibly effective for learning outcomes, right? I think about, you know, at Arizona State dreamscape learn as a VR modality that was deployed for gen ed classes like Biology 101, and the results were staggering. Students were retaining much more of the material. Students who were neurodivergent or from diverse backgrounds, English as a second language, they were all doing much better. So the data are clear that technologically enhanced learning modalities both help meet students meet and also help students develop a skill set that they can translate to workforce. And yet, higher ed is sort of sitting here in this moment of oh my gosh, there's these different needs being articulated. There's a whole slew of possible solutions. And I think that what's happening is that it's becoming increasingly difficult for us in higher ed to have the conversations that we need, need to have, because it's become so politicized, it's become so fractured. And, you know, we've lost the focus on service and on serving our role and and we've lost that mission focus of sort of serving students and serving the democracy.  Kaitlin: Yeah, we are in the middle of a very complex landscape, and I'm curious to hear more about your thoughts about you know, what are the waves forward, right? Like at a time of so many kind of competing, I wouldn't say priorities, but competing needs, or maybe different levers that are being pulled. And you know, how do we serve both the needs of students and the needs of industry? And make sure you know higher ed is fulfilling its mission. And higher ed, of course, very broadly defined, right? It looks very different in different places. Pardis: 100%. Kaitlin: But what do you see as some ways forward in this, in this complex space.  Pardis: And again, you know, you don't want to say something is a magic bullet, let alone do you want to say technology is a silver bullet that's going to solve everything, right? But I do think that, you know, in higher ed, we're in this, we're finally starting to feel the very real tensions between an ecosystem that has, even though you have the protections of tenure, has been a bit risk averse, right? And I think one of the reasons that Arizona State has been so successful in innovation is that there is a very high tolerance for failure. There's a high there's an ecosystem where there's a high tolerance for failure, so that, you know, experimentation is kind of, you know, sort of the coin of the realm, right? Experimenting. When I was a president, I had a high tolerance for failure, high fidelity to data. You know, you do your homework, and then you start to experiment. And, you know, we're in this moment where there has been a flourishing of Ed Tech. There has been a flourishing of technologies like, I mean, just at the very basic level, ChatGPT, right? And, you know, learning how to teach with these technologies really requires us to have some hard conversations about what is the infrastructure that's necessary in higher ed to create a sustainable architecture where technology can enhance learning and allow us to meet the needs of students and employers. And so that's what I'm doing now. My colleagues and I, you know, we've started our own consulting project, EES Associates, and what we're trying to do is actually help leaders in higher education figure out, first, what are the technologies that, as you mentioned, Kaitlin, you know, universities are different. It's not a one size fits all, right. And so something that's going to work for Arizona State, you know, something like Dreamscape Learn, which is, you know, scalable, big, you know, that's going to meet that population of over 100,000 students is not going to fit for Pomona College, right, which has less than 2,000 students. But that's not to say that Pomona College can't benefit from technologically enhanced learning, right? And so actually, places like Pomona are great places to have those conversations about technologies like ChatGPT and, you know, what are the ethics? How do we think about it? How can we study it and then use it as a problem solve? You know, people, other people have used this, you know, analogy, sort of like when the calculator was invented. At first, math teachers were like, how are we ever going to teach math? And now, of course, we can't imagine teaching math without calculators. You know, someday we won't be able to imagine teaching many subjects without ChatGPT, but we still have to learn and harness and so, you know, there is a place for different institutions to plug in. And so what we do is we try to figure out, okay, what's the best technology to meet your needs, and also, what is your unique skill set as a college or university or an EdTech group, what is your unique skill set where you can serve this larger mission of kind of cracking this code of, what do we do to continue to make higher education relevant for workforce, relevant for student needs, ultimately relevant for social Mobility? Right? Because social mobility is really what all of this is about. So we help match what the right technologies are with the right institutions. And then I think even more importantly, we help to make those technologies sustainable. Because sitting in the seats that I've sat in, Dean, Provost, President, we all know that sometimes we go with a one off and we spend lots of money and say, Okay, we're going to use this software, or we're going to use this and this is going to be our magic bullet, but we don't make it sustainable. We don't make it a sustainable part of our ecosystem. And so it's just becomes an add on, or it just becomes something that is a point of frustration, either for the leadership or for the faculty who are like, how am I, you know, because we don't build the ecosystem to support it. So for example, we say, you know, this, the pandemic was a great example. We're like, Okay, everybody has to now teach online. Now, the institutions that succeeded at that were the institutions, again, like ASU, that had an infrastructure that said, Look, teaching online isn't just about turning your camera on, there is an art to it, and we have a team of instructional designers who are going to help you, right? We have a team of people who have this expertise, and we're going to leverage that. So I think, you know, we're at this moment now where we can, where we have technologies. It's really about building that bridge and figuring out how to harmonize what Higher Ed does really well with what Ed Tech does well. And then figuring out what the sweet spot is to serve the needs of students and the democracy, broadly speaking, workforce being one component of that. Julian: It's very it's very exciting Pardis, and for sure, the technology does offer all these new tools that we've never had before to make these connections and really begin to bring the people what they're clamoring for. I guess I'm interested to hear a little bit about, well, I love that you're thinking about your practice in terms of, you know, kind of focusing on, you know, the superpowers of each of your partner institutions who can drive this. I mean, you were talking about presidents, Provosts. I mean, where, like, where would you begin? I mean, obviously, coming up as a senior leader, I guess, is the top, but I'm interested to hear you riff on that a little bit.  Pardis: Yeah. I mean, and thanks for allowing me to kind of think into that with you. You know, I think one of the pitfalls that often happens is that these, these initiatives and efforts are often driven by the IT office, right? That the tech office thing, you know, or offices outside of Academic Affairs, and so then it's just seen as a well, that's an IT issue, that's not us or, you know, how do we fit it in? I think where you see the most success is when it's both top down and bottom up, right? And I think it's where you see the most success is where you have leadership that says, Yes, I want to innovate, right? I want to do this, and I want the buy in, you know, from all parts of the house, because if it just becomes one more thing that, you know, a provost has to make the faculty do. I mean, that's not going to work. And if it's just one more thing, we pile on the plate of a faculty, you know, I was that faculty member at one point. You know, when I was at Pomona, at one point, I was chairing two departments, teaching a full load, directing an institute, and I had, you know, three young kids at the time. I mean, it just was not sustainable, right? So you can't and so I think about, you know, the 2016 version of me of Pardis. And I think if my dean or president was like, Okay, well now you have to teach with this technology. I mean, I would have just exploded, right or imploded, but if my dean or my president had come to me and said, you know, we have this offering. We have this team of instructional designers, and actually, you know, for me, the biggest kind of aha moment for me was having gone from being at Pomona, where there was zero online teaching, and I couldn't I was like, Oh my God, that's a huge lift to then actually teaching online at ASU, I suddenly realized, oh my gosh, so much of my time was freed up. I remember I had this semester where I was fully teaching online, right? And, you know, you can be anywhere in the world. So, and, you know, my PhD is in anthropology, I suddenly realized I could be doing field like it actually opened up time, you know. And I, I could be grading, you know, at 10 o'clock at night when my kids went to sleep, or I could be recording, I remember I was recording a lecture at like 11pm when my kids went to sleep. It meant that I could be home with them during the day. You know, it actually opened up more time and possibility. But no one had narrated it to me like that before, you know, when I was at Pomona. And importantly, no one had given me the resources, the scaffolding to support that, right? So I was suddenly much more open to it, because it was supported, and it was somebody, you know, sat with me and, you know, walked me through it, and it actually opened up more time for me. And that was such an aha moment, because for 11 years, I've been a faculty member at a small liberal arts college thinking, holy moly. You know, absolutely not. I could never teach online. That seems like totally out of the realm of possibility. That's just one more thing. And then when I did flip to teaching online, I thought, This is magic. I suddenly have so much more time, right? And it was just kind of getting over that hump. But I think what you can't as a provost, I what I could not expect my faculty, that's, you know, I put on my Provost hat at Montana. As a provost, I could not, I could not, in good faith, go to my faculty and say, Okay, now you all have to teach online without saying. See, here are all the ways we're going to support you. Here's the scaffolding. I think you just have to approach it with intentionality.  Kaitlin: Well, right? And I my brain is going in a lot of directions right now, but you know, I think you're saying so many things that are prompting different thoughts. But I think you know, one thing that just sticks out to me is, you know, it's like with education, with with Ed Tech, there are, there's so much opportunity, but it's also like, what's the unique problem we're trying to solve? Right? And making sure that the technology that you're bringing in is solving the challenge that your students are facing, or that your institution is facing, or that your faculty are facing, because otherwise it can feel, instead of, you know, like an opportunity, as you're saying, it can, it can feel like a burden or an additional, you know, barrier, right, right?    Pardis: And I think at that macro level, I think the problem we're trying to solve is articulating and narrating the value of what we're doing. And I think is, is also, you know, being what education is, which is the great equalizer. And I think now that we know the power of technology in leveling the playing field, right? Yeah, you know it's, it's almost unconscionable for us to not use it like, if there is something that starts to close equity gaps. Why would we stratify them by only allowing certain people and certain institutions access to a technology that we know can enhance learning for, let's say, traditionally underrepresented or historically excluded populations? It's unconscionable for us to turn a blind eye to that.  Julian: Yeah, it sure is. So you're touching on so many critical aspects of what it takes to do this work. And I'm interested to hear Pardis based on your lessons learned. What are practical steps our audience can take to become forces in the future of higher ed? Pardis: I think a lot of it is, is that kind of deep listening. And, you know, we all know it's out there, right? And I think, I think that there is sometimes, in some cases, been a bit of a stigma from, you know, it's, I'm happy to hear that we talk about workforce development, right? I mean, we've discussed this, but it used to be on the fringes. And it used to be like, if you talk about workforce in a higher ed setting. I mean, that's it. You know, you're, you're you're out of a club. You know, you're canceled, you're out of the club. And yet, you know, that's, if you think about again, the mission of higher ed, why Higher Ed was started. That's such a critical part of it. So, you know, I think that deep listening to what are the demands of workforce, of the democracy, and what are the demands of students? So if we go back to that technology piece, you know, workforce is saying we want students that are fluent in different types of technology. So not only does technology become an equalizing modality of teaching, but it becomes an equalizing currency, if you will, so that students graduate with a skill set that's very much in demand for our society and for our workforce. So back to your very, very good question, Julian, of like, what can be done? I think, I think it's really building those bridges. So building, you know, and I know that that's a lot of the work you all are doing, is building the bridges between higher ed and workforce. And I'm trying to build the bridge between, you know, students demands and higher ed, as well as the bridge between, you know, you've got all these technological solutions and higher ed, right, where it's like, this doesn't have to be so hard. You know, there are ways to actually make things easier. And, and, you know, rather than sitting there and doing, you know, long division by hand, let's start using some calculators here, you know, and, and, you know, figuring out how we can prepare students to meet the needs for workforce, but also how we can meet students needs, you know, how we can actually capture their attention, You know, and and engage them. I would say, I think that deep listening to what, what the demands are, rather than just saying, you know, we have a product. It's tried and tested. 100 years we've been teaching this way. I think we're at a moment where we can do some deeper listening and say, okay, you know what? Maybe we're falling short. And, wow, there's all these solutions out there. How can we live into our mission here of supporting our students while also fulfilling our role to, you know, to uphold the democracy?  Julian: Yeah. And then, I mean, I guess the piece that I spend a lot of time thinking about and trying to build into our own work and consulting is, how do we make sure that that this, that this movement, for this forward movement, isn't just another flash in the pan, fad? Because I do think a lot of times you know these, these things kind of come and go with charismatic leaders or grants. And so how do we, how do we make it stick? And I mean, I think you're getting through the listening, but and through the sort of more holistic and institution-wide approach interested to your thoughts though, that like, how do we make sure this sticks, especially now you're joining the consulting world. How do we as helpers and facilitators leave our colleagues in the institutions with a new way?  Pardis: Yeah, you know, I think first and foremost, the hallmark of a good consultant is that you get in, you set something up, and then you leave and it's running where they're not dependent on any of us. I mean, that's that, to me, is like the hallmark of a good consultant. You come in with an offering. You build that, you know, and I know this is what you all do, too. You, you help to build an ecosystem that runs, as opposed to them suddenly being dependent on you, you know. You say, look, here's some and here's the way to make it sustainable. I think that's so key. So we talk about the deep listening, I think having the commitment to creating a sustainable infrastructure where these that's how you that's how you take it from being a fad, right? So that's how you go from, okay, well, everybody else has VR goggles. I guess we should, you know, it's, I always use the analogy of the climbing wall, where it was like, well, all the other universities had climbing walls, so now we need a climbing wall so students can see it on their tour. Well, like, what's the purpose of that? You got to narrate the value of that, right? I mean, that's a little bit different. But with technology, rather than being like, look, you know, I remember at a certain point, you know, maker spaces was all the rage, right? Everybody had to have a maker space, right? Okay, but how do you build that into the entire ecosystem? How do you build that into classes, you know, with technologies like virtual reality? Again, that's why I admire what Arizona State University did. They said, We're going to take this incredible technology that has this incredible power, and we're not going to start with like the electives that, like a few people take, we're going to go in with Bio 101, and we're going to make it part of Gen Ed, you know? And I think that's the difference. That's what makes something sustainable, because that is then now something that's part, central part of the ecosystem. The worst thing that can be done is, okay, we're going to set up an institute to do that, right? I mean, and we saw that, you know, we've seen waves of that. You know, there was a wave of everybody had a cyber security Institute. There was a wave of everybody had a Human Rights Institute. Everybody had a diversity. This is, that was the narrative around, like a diversity officer. It's like, you can't put all of that on one person or on a an institute. It has to be baked in. You have to empower your diverse I mean, I have so much respect for chief diversity officers because, you know, and the ones where they're super successful are the ones where the President has empowered them to be, you know, transforming the entire ecosystem. You know, one thing Pomona did really well was say, okay, diversity is going to be a strategy, a hiring strategy, but we're also going to bake it into our tenure and promotion processes. So again, it's really about how you kind of bake it into your ecosystem. The worst thing you can do is have it be an add on where you're not supporting it with resources for implementation, and you're not actually articulating how and why it's central to the mission of the institution.  Kaitlin: What's your perspective on the fact that everything in our landscape is moving so quickly? Economic changes are happening so quickly, and something like spinning up, you know, as you said, the theme of spinning up cybersecurity institutes. Well, how do we respond quickly, while also trying to bring a whole institution along with us, right? How do you move quickly to implement these initiatives when you're also trying to, you know, build momentum across, you know, hundreds or 1,000s of faculty and staff.  Pardis: As an anthropologist, you know, we've, I'm sure we've all heard the phrase, you know, culture eats strategy for breakfast, right? And I think that there, that there's a, you know, oppressions to that phrase, because I think you begin with culture, and I know we touched on that, but I think in order to be able to be nimble, I think you have to create a culture of nimbleness, you know. And I again, I think that there are institutions Southern New Hampshire is another great example, you know. Another fantastic example is National University, right? You know, you've got these great examples of places where they've really made innovation a part of the culture, and they've made nimbleness a part of the culture. And so, you know, there, I remember when I was at ASU, there was a joke. So people would say, Well, if you don't like an initiative at ASU, just wait 10 minutes and it'll change. And that wasn't necessarily a pejorative thing. It was like, Well, look, we're going to try these things. And what's great is that some of them really work. You know, Dreamscape Learn really worked. Having a school for the future of innovation in society. I mean, when that was stood up, you know, was super forward thinking, it really worked, right? And so actually committing at all levels, and you know, from the top all the way to, you know, every staff member, every faculty member, you know, it becomes a part of the culture. And so I think narrating the importance of nimbleness to your point, in articulating, you know, this is a fast paced environment we're in, you know. And I think actually calling that out, right, it's a fast paced environment we're in, and that can sort of be a little bit jarring coming back though to that anchoring touch point of and the students need us like the students need us to be these anchors and to do right by them. So we need to shift our culture a little bit so that these different strategies can grow and flourish quickly, and we also need to be like it comes back to what I was saying about high tolerance for failure. We need to be okay with an initiative that maybe didn't work, right and to say, You know what, we thought this would be a good idea. It didn't work, we're going to sunset it and we're going to morph it into something else. I think being able to sit with that and be okay with that is also a really important part of the culture.  Kaitlin: So, yeah, I think that that that theme of of baking in these the initiative, kind of regardless of what of, I guess, what you're alluding to, you're regardless of the what the initiative is exactly about, baking it into the strategy, and baking it into kind of the culture of the place and the prioritization of that initiative within this space is is critical, and we really appreciate you calling that out as a key element of you know how we all become forces in the future of this work, whether from a consulting standpoint, or, you know, being a leader or actor in in the future of Higher Ed parties. I'm curious, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Pardis: Oh, well, thank you for that. You know, reach out. Reach out to me and very you know, very easy to find on social media. Email me. EES Associates. We'll send you our link. This was something we're doing now, particularly a lot of institutions overseas are really asking for our help, because they are, you know, wanting to take bigger risks. You know, as they start to grow. And, you know, I would say, reach out to us any time. I mean, this is something, you know, I'm so passionate about, wanting to figure out ways of serving and making higher ed better. You know, it did require me really stepping down from my leadership role to be able to actually feel like I could live into my purpose, which was to spread the message of, Hey, there. You know, there's a different way of doing things, and we can serve a lot more people if we just allow ourselves to have the conversations, you know, what? Like sometimes we have to sit in the fire of discomfort, like it may be that, yes, it's not the most comfortable first conversation to have, you know, with colleagues to say, Okay, we're gonna try something new. I'm the first to admit that. But there are ways into that. And there are ways into, hey, this could make your life easier while also serving, you know, students in the democracy. And let's face it, we're all here because we want to serve students, because we love our students, and because we love the contribution that we make to society. And so I think the entry point, the intentionality, which would you bring to these difficult conversations and just recognizing calling them out, like, look, I recognize this is not easy, and I recognize higher ed is in a moment of reckoning. So we have a choice. We can lead the pack, and we can lead and be a part of the problem solve, and actually, you know, keep higher ed as as this important bedrock of democracy, or we can kind of, do, you know, a freeze response, of like, there's just too much coming at me, you know? So I'm incredibly passionate about this, because I've seen the problem, I've seen the solutions, and I just want to start building the bridge.  Julian: Well, you're a fantastic messenger. We're so honored and lucky to have you here, and you know, helping you to spread that message and look forward to continuing to look at ways that we can push this forward together. Really thank you so much Pardis.  Pardis: Thank you so much for having me here, and thank you for the great work that you all are doing. It's. It's incredibly inspiring. It's an honor to be here and in conversation with you both.  Kaitlin: I really appreciate it. Thank you so much. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at Work Forces, dot info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like, and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Bob Lerman, an Institute Fellow at the Urban Institute and leading researcher on and advocate for apprenticeships, discusses the role of apprenticeships in workforce development and economic mobility. He defines apprenticeships as a combination of on-the-job learning and classroom instruction, leading to occupational expertise. Lerman emphasizes the importance of work-based learning and the need for a major effort to promote apprenticeships among employers. He believes that a robust apprenticeship system can significantly contribute to a positive change in the U.S. workforce. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  Welcome back. I'm really looking forward to this conversation today. Julian apprenticeships are becoming increasingly front and center as a pathway to economic mobility in the US, even more so since our springtime discussion with John Colborn from Apprenticeships for America. So it really feels like the right time to take a deeper dive into this topic.  Julian: Yes, I completely agree, and I am particularly excited to get the perspective of today's guest. He's someone I've known for decades who has been beating the drum on the importance of apprenticeship since I met him, and that drumbeat is getting louder by the day. Kaitlin: It really is. And without further ado, let's introduce our guest, Bob Lehrman. Bob is an Institute Fellow in the Center on Labor, Human Services and Population at Urban Institute, and the leading US researcher on apprenticeship. He's a member of the board of the International Network on Innovation Apprenticeship, head of Urban Institute's Apprenticeship Group, and established the American Institute for Innovative Apprenticeship. Bob has published widely on apprenticeship, currently heads the evaluation of the American Apprenticeship Initiative and is Chairman of the Board of Apprenticeships for America. He is also a Professor of Economics at American University and a Research Fellow at Iza in Bonn, Germany. We really appreciate you taking the time to speak with us today, Bob, Bob Lehrman: Well, thank you for having me. Julian: Yes, Bob, really appreciate you taking the time and you always, always forget to talk with you. And please tell us about your background and history with the apprenticeship movement. Bob: I studied youth unemployment when I was in graduate school. My dissertation was on youth unemployment, and I had a long interest in young people entering the workforce, but we always saw that the unemployment rates were pretty high. And later, I worked at the Department of Labor for a few years on welfare reform, but also youth issues. Of course, at the Labor Department, there are a lot of programs that were aimed at young people who were having difficulty in the labor market, but subsequently I came to feel that those programs were really marginal to the overall system. That I co-authored a piece that was part of The Forgotten, Half the idea that a lot of people who don't go and complete a four year degree weren't doing nearly as well, and the government spent so much more on BA level people, so I was looking for some things that would help mainstream young people enter the labor force, and that's when I started learning more about the European systems, especially Germany and Switzerland. That culminated in some work that I did in the late 1980s with an article called The Compelling case for Youth Apprenticeship in 1990 and part of the movement that came about from commissions and research and just a general recognition that we needed a better system to help young people enter careers. We were successful, in a way, because George H.W. Bush proposed the National Youth Apprenticeship Act of 1992 and Bill Clinton liked apprenticeship, who followed him, but the new bill that came out of the Clinton administration barely mentioned apprenticeship. It was called the School-to-Work Opportunities Act, and it really involved very thin interventions for the many instead of intensive and thick interventions for the group I was concerned about, and ultimately that project sort of faded out. There was a sunset provision in the legislation, and it wasn't renewed. But I kept at it because I didn't see a better way than apprenticeship. I will say one other thing, which is, having worked in a factory, I came to believe that… I came to the realization that a lot of what we might call unskilled work, and machine operators didn't have to be unskilled. That the best machine operators were really valuable, and they were far more valuable than just someone who got a few weeks of training. And so I had embedded in me this idea that skill can be applied to all kinds of occupations and mastery is something much more significant than just being able to get through the job.  Kaitlin: That additional context is is very eye opening, right as far as how you come to this work, Bob, and the applied nature of it for you as well. And you know, as you're talking about your background with this work, one thing that sticks out to me is there are so many, there are so many movements in education, and some that are much more long standing than others. And I'm just curious to I'm wondering, as you're providing this background, you know, what has it been like to stick with this, with apprenticeships as this movement for the over the long term and like and you know what has made you really stay with it all these years, and especially now that it's become so front and center? Bob: Yeah, well, it's, it hasn't been easy. There's not a lot hasn't been a lot of funding for it, but and people used to wonder when in a Washington meeting I would bring up apprenticeship again, I didn't see anything better. And then a few things inspired me to continue to push hard. One was the expansion of apprenticeship in the UK, where they had allowed the program to atrophy and go down to about 150,000 and then within six, seven years, they went up to 800,000 and the Prime Minister would talk about apprenticeship, and it became something on the tube trains that they would advertise for apprentices. And I got to know some of the people involved in that effort, and then some friends in South Carolina started to do better in terms of reaching out to companies. And I went down to see how they did it. And that was inspiring. That was starting in around 2008 or nine through 2013-14, and also I didn't hurt that I was asked to write some chapters here and there, and so that pushed me to do more thinking and to do more writing about apprenticeships. Kaitlin: Can you please define what we mean by apprenticeships? Because I think there's a lot you know, we hear registered we hear non registered. Can could you spend a little bit of time there just around definition of terms? Bob: Apprenticeship is a process by which an individual learns both on the job, contributes to production while being on the job, and gains and learns theoretical concepts off the job, all leading to occupational expertise, or at least full competence in a rewarding occupation, in the desirable occupation. So it's this combination of learning by doing actual work and then learning off the job. The actual work is very important and often left out because people say work based learning, but work itself is relevant, and work is what helps an employer recoup some of the benefits. Work is also relevant to learning and doing real work gives people a sense of accomplishment. Let's remember young people when they're very young. They like to do things. They like to make things. They like to get around things. They don't like to just sit and I mean, yes, sitting and reading is good, but in addition to that, they like to do things. And I think by the time a person is 17, 18, 19, having them be in a pure classroom setting for their whole learning process, I think doesn't work for a lot of people. It may work for a minority of people, and God bless them. Let them do that. We don't have to have the same process for everybody. I have a phrase, sameness is not equality. If people learn in different ways, then pushing sameness is going to be disequalizing. Apprenticeship is fundamentally about learning, but learning through practice. Now in the US, we have a system called registered apprenticeship, and state and federal offices of apprenticeship, about half the half the ways of registering are with the federal government. Half the states and in 28 states or so states have offices, state apprenticeship agencies. And organizations, employers, that want to create a registered program have to gain approval. There's some paperwork involved laying out what the occupation is. It has to be called an apprenticeable occupation, which I believe could be almost any occupation. But in the terms of the government, it's an apprenticeship that has already an occupation, that's already been apprenticed in one way or another. Depending on whether you go to a state or the federal government, there's an approval process for a program to be registered. The term sponsor is the group that applies for the registration. And a sponsor might be one employer, several employers could be some outside organization, such as a community college or even a high school, and sometimes it's a joint employer union program. So that's the way the registered system works. But of course, we have a lot of companies doing elaborate training for an occupation that could be called an unregistered apprenticeship. Julian: So Bob, it sort of feels like everywhere we go in our consulting work and in many of our conversations on this podcast, apprenticeships keep keep coming up. So what's different now?  Bob: What's different is, you're right. People are all talking about it, and there are lots of individual programs, initiatives, states, getting more oriented toward it, and that's a great thing, and that keeps me going. The mission is to scale the system, to make it be a mainstream option for all kinds of young people. And we have a long way to go to get there. Also the federal government increased its investment, but relative to other countries and relative to what we need to do, it's still fairly small from a national perspective. So what's different is, I think people understand it better than we did in the early 1990s. I think there is less pushback about the college for all movement that as college costs have, you know, just spectacularly increased and the union side of it is a little more mixed. I think, in that period, they really felt they owned apprenticeship and were very nervous about letting it widen. It wasn't going to be easy to widen, but anyway, they were concerned about it. Think that is a more mixed picture now. But what's the same is that we still are dwarfed by what I call the academic only approach, and the funding for that academic only approach is massively greater, I'm not looking to get that kind of funding, but a fraction of that, I think, would go a long way, and we still have to achieve that. One thing I do believe, which is quite different, is that people understand w.hy we want to do it. They understand least, much of the understanding is that you want to help young people learn by doing and get into rewarding careers. And that's a change. There are disputes about how to do it, but the why seems to be more widespread, by the way, way back in the late 80s, early 90s. You know, if I talked to a taxi driver and told him what I was doing and saying, some people think it's too early to start. In late high school, he said, Oh, that's too late. He should start. And through those years, people would, you know, informally say to me, yeah, that's a good idea. Keep at it, Bob. Kaitlin: There are a lot of different threads for us to pull upon from what you just said, Bob, and I think maybe where we can go first is what you're saying about some of the initiatives, where that you're that you're excited about, or where you're seeing promise. We'd love to hear that. You know what? What is showing the most promise, from your standpoint? Bob: I'm working with state senator Rosapepe of Maryland, who got passed into law the notion that by 2031, 45% of Maryland high school graduates will have done the high school component of a registered apprenticeship. And he's very hands on in looking at, you know, what occupations and how to make apprenticeship a route to those occupations. We're seeing Indiana start a big effort. You know, other states, California said that the governor has a goal of 500,000 and so there's a lot of push toward that. We've also, as I say, learned more. We're learning more from Labor Department projects that have provided funding for intermediaries and others to do apprenticeship. And out of that has come a network of organizations that have gained some experience in what I call the selling and organizing function with employers. So that's going on. And I think, in a way, that effort, although I think we should do things differently. Now, that effort was good in getting things started, getting some organizational expertise, but now the big question will come, can we scale and what do we need to do that, and how to make it, as I say, into a mainstream option. Julian: Which is a perfect segue to the next thread that I'd like to pull on, which is, well, you know, you alluded to this a bit, a bit you mentioned this earlier, but if you could elaborate about really now, what are the greatest challenges to establishing apprenticeships at scale? Bob: The challenge, as I say, is how to do it, and I strongly believe that people underestimate the issue of how to get an employer to adopt apprenticeship. That's an investment that the government could help with in a big way. Once an employer starts doing apprenticeship, they start seeing the benefits, not all, and they don't always have openings that apprentices can enter, but if we don't have a major effort to sort of sell and organize that's going to be the biggest barrier. I think once we get employers, the scale of employers on board, you know, like, once they build that, the people will come, I think once the offers are out there, once employers are demanding from school systems to collaborate and saying, If you don't, we'll find another way to do the off-job learning, that's going to continue to drive the outcomes. I think President Biden put out an executive order for the federal government to look into doing more apprenticeships years ago, when I looked at it and did a search on the Office of Personnel Management, a big handbook, the word apprenticeship was mentioned only once, and that was for Labor Department hiring of apprenticeship training representatives. So there have been many efforts to engage with the Office of Personnel Management to do, to do more. Maybe this executive order will help. I think we're trying to get more states interested in using apprenticeship for state employment. I think that should be a somewhat easier lift, but it's still the case that you need to persuade the employers, as I say, they might be public or private employers, and we're seeing lots of shoots around that are starting to bear a little fruit. And I'm still in this business, because I'm gonna do everything I can to help it grow.  Julian: What about challenges at the policy level, particularly nationally, but you're also talking a bit about states, like, how do we get those policymakers to really move beyond the grant funded approach? Bob: Yeah, that's a great question. It opens up the issue of registered versus unregistered apprenticeships. It happens that in New York there are about the same number of apprentices as in Indiana. What is that telling us that's in terms of registered apprenticeship. That's telling us that the state apprenticeship agency in New York has been traditionally very restrictive. Pennsylvania has also got a pretty restrictive agency. They have all inappropriate criteria for making a program registered. And bear in mind, this is all voluntary. Employers do not have to do apprenticeship. They can actually call anything they do apprenticeship in the UK, apprentice. The word apprenticeship is copyrighted, and the government owns the copyright, so you can't just call anything an apprenticeship, but there are some very good programs that are not registered, and we don't have that many incentives, and we do have some barriers for registration. That's why the we at Apprenticeships for America believe in the role of intermediaries to help the employers start the programs register the programs we'd like to see registration, because, in a way, that's the only way we can have some broad based funding as well, because you do have to have some approval, some test of whether this apprenticeship is a real one if you're going to provide, for example, funding for the off job learning, so that that is a barrier for many companies. And you know, we're hoping that this intermediary approach, where not only can they try to persuade companies, but try to create what we call group sponsors, where the employer only has to sign one page of an employee player acceptance agreement to join a program, and that those can be significant. Again, I would say if, if we, if we had some real funding. And interestingly enough, yesterday, there was a Washington Post editorial promoting a big funding increase in apprenticeship. Talking about apprenticeship. Heather Long of the Post wrote that article, if we got in the range of three to $8 billion which is, you know, a significant increase, but small compared to a lot of other programs. I mean, after all, Job Corps alone is like 1.6 or 7 billion, and the evaluations are not all that positive about it. I think if we can persuade some shifting of funding, some new funding, perhaps that will help drive the city. System and will help promote the program and maybe overcome some of the obstacles. Kaitlin: So transitioning us a bit based on your lessons learned over you know, more recently and over the years, what are practical steps our audience can take to become forces in the apprenticeship space, especially as it gains momentum, yeah, Bob: If they're employers and they don't have a program, contact Apprenticeships for America will set you up with some people who can help you start one. You know, I think be supportive of any legislation and of policies that can promote apprenticeship. I like to say that when you asked me about my motivation, I I wasn't giving you the complete answer, because the complete answer, and this may be pie in the sky, but the complete answer is that a really robust apprenticeship system can change America, and it can change America because you will have a lot more people proud of what they do, gain a sense of occupational identity, feel more mature early on in life, which I believe, will have all sorts of side benefits, like enhancing marriages and increasing the marriage rate. Just have a greater sense of belonging, a greater sense of feeling that they're contributing to whatever is being done. There was an old phrase called the community of practice, that they'll feel a part of a community of practice, just like lawyers and doctors do, welders do. We don't recognize it, but they do, and when you get to that level of expertise. It's just a great feeling of competence. Moreover, I think many of them through this process will feel that they're learning how to learn. And we have the system here where, I mean, it's changed a bit in terms of people going back to school, but the mainstream system is you finish high school and then you immediately go into a continuing academic only setting. Some people might want that setting, but later on in life, after they've learned how to learn, and there are many opportunities for that, but these social dimensions, I think, are among the main things that drive me And push me toward doing whatever I can to make America better through this approach. Julian: I'm so glad you added that point, and it is so key. And I mean, I'm even thinking of intergenerational connections. I mean, like, look, you know, we talk a lot about the silos, the divisions in this country and work brings people together and and also with the just the rapid changes in the workplace, we have to learn by doing. I mean, our books are obsolete today. They're published. I hate to say it. Bob: Absolutely, and that intergenerational point is quite interesting as well, because again, when you have a parent who has accomplished something in a field, whether their children will go into that same field, they will recognize that, hey, my dad knows a lot of things that I don't know, and I think it's healthy.  Julian: So Bob, as we, as we wrap up our discussion, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work? Bob: At Urban Institute, they can Google. Robert Lerman, Urban Institute apprenticeship, and there are a lot of studies that we've done. They can continue to follow apprenticeships for America, those would be the main things. Or if they're really interested, write me, [email protected] and I will try to respond. But I think we have, we have a great network of workforce organizations around the country. You've probably interviewed many of the people in that network, and I think many of them once they learn more, once they learn the benefits that they can demonstrate to companies, they could move in the direction of going for what some people call the gold standard of apprenticeship, rather than a shorter term training program. Nothing wrong with some short term training programs, but apprenticeship is really a full fledged pathway to a rewarding career and and so once they learn that, they can start working with companies. Another thing that people can look at is at Urban we created some a library of apprenticeship programs called apprenticeshipstandard.standards.org, and you can just plug in an occupation and see what programs are out there. And we've been creating quality skill standards for a variety of apprenticeships. So those are some of the ways that people can enter into this wonderful field. Julian: So, okay Work Forces, people you have no excuse but to become involved with apprenticeships and if all else fails, write, Bob. But thank you so much, Bob. This has really been great. Such a pleasure to talk with you and really, really do appreciate you taking the time.  Bob: Thank you both Kaitlin and Julian, great to see you guys. Kaitlin: As a brief update to this episode, not long after we recorded our conversation with Bob, he was awarded the Harold W. McGraw, Jr. prize in education, specifically earning the Lifelong Learning prize. We want to extend our congratulations to Bob on this extraordinary accomplishment.  That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We are also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces.info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify, please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.

Sasha Thackaberry Voinovich, President of SkillsWave, an education benefit company, discusses the challenges and opportunities in bridging the gap between educational institutions and the workforce. She emphasizes the need for faster adaptation in curriculum development and teaching methods to meet the evolving demands of the job market. Sasha also highlights the importance of lifelong learning and upskilling, especially in the face of rapid technological advancements. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Julian; In today's conversation, we circle back to where it all started for us. We met today's guest way back during our time at Southern New Hampshire University. Like so many people who worked at SNHU, as we call it, Sasha Thackaberry Voinovich has applied that experience to build new online learning programs and models.  Kaitlin: Yes, Julian, it's great to see a familiar face on today's podcast, and we're looking forward to learning more about Sasha's latest work and her approach to leading a new enterprise. In her latest incarnation, Sasha's serving as President of SkillsWave, an education benefit company that recently spun off from D2L. SkillsWave connects employers with education partners to fill skills gaps and develop talent into a competitive advantage. Previously, Sasha held leadership roles in online learning with Pearson, Louisiana State University, Southern New Hampshire University, and Cuyahoga Community College. She's on the Quality Matters board. Has published articles in numerous higher ed publications, and was a co-recipient of the 2013 MOOC award for excellence through the Open Education Consortium, Sasha holds a Bachelor of Fine Arts in dance from the University of Akron and an MAT and PhD in higher education administration from Kent State University. Welcome to the conversation, Sasha. Sasha Thackaberry Voinovich: Thank you for having me. This is going to be fun. I always I feel like we have a SNHU alumni network, right? Julian: We really do. Kaitlin: It does feel that way. It's great to see you today, Sasha, and we're looking forward to diving into this conversation with you. Can you please expanding upon the bio that Julian just talked us through? Can you please tell us a bit more about your background and how you approach your work? Sasha: I actually, like many of us accidentally ended up in the field of ed tech. So if you go back far enough, I was a K 12 teacher, and then got sort of into curriculum development and then educational technology. I really leaned into instructional design earlier in my career. So I think I approach everything sort of from a backwards design perspective. What is the goal at the end of the day? And then how do we measure the success of that goal? And then what do we need to do to get to that goal? So that's sort of an approach that I've had for a while. I never wanted to be president of anything. I've always wanted to be in a position where I could make change, right? So I've considered myself to be sort of change maker, and it sort of led to this position. I feel like I've been preparing for this position that I didn't know I wanted for a really long time. I've always considered every place you work, you have this opportunity to grow and learn and change things and evolve things. And I think the biggest part of the last decade of my career has been learning how to be a more effective leader, which is actually a very similar skill set to being an educator, if you do it right. And the other thing I've been developing, I would say, and myself, is patience also over the last decade. Dispositionally, that's important for a leader, and it is not something that comes easily to me. Kaitlin: No, absolutely. Thank you. Yeah, it's great to learn more about, you know, kind of where you started and what drives you to this point. So thank you.  Julian: Yeah, no, absolutely. And so, Sasha, what are the problems that you've sought to solve at D2L, now at skills wave, and we're particularly interested in the bridging of conversations across educational institutions in the workforce. Sasha: Yep, and there is definitely a bridge that needs to be, I think, in some cases, even built and then subsequently crossed there has been well, you all, you all know this very well. This isn't a new conversation, right? We've been having this conversation for a really long time about, how do we make sure that educational institutions and training providers really are preparing people for the workforce, for entering the workforce, and for changing careers. I think changing careers can be really, really challenging, and there isn't always an alignment between the timetable that it takes to evolve curriculum or teaching methods and strategies and what the world of work needs, and that change is accelerating more so than ever before. There's also sort of political forces at play and generational differences that have really put a lot of daylight onto the relevancy of higher education, but there's still really compelling data that degrees make a huge difference in the lives of individuals and their families in terms of their ability to change their economic circumstances. I think a lot of folks have been in this space that this needs to be a both and, yet it's been very hard to do that. I think structurally, a lot of educational institutions are not well set up to be able to move fast, but we also know they can move fast if they have to right. Everybody, everybody moved really, really fast when we had a pandemic. So that was encouraging to me. It's been a little less encouraging since then to see that some of the institutions are very, very focused on physical presence, again, because the world of work is not entirely based on physical presence anymore, but this from the skill based perspective, continually learning new skills is absolutely going to be essential for individuals and the competitive advantage for businesses, and they know it, which is why they're really investing in this space. But nobody's cracked the code on how to...how do educational institutions respond faster to the needs of businesses? How do we make sure that individuals learn faster and in different ways and different things, right? AI is not the enemy. It is, even though I do still occasionally fear Skynet. So be no nice to be nice to the robots. But I do think that there is we're gonna have to interact and work with technology very differently, and it is going to require everyone, even those who don't, work in the technology field or technology-adjacent field, it's going to require everybody to have more technological skills than ever before to be successful in non technology jobs. Kaitlin: Absolutely. Yeah. And I think as we as we go in that direction, Sasha, could you tell us a little bit more about what SkillsWave as a company? Sasha: What we are is a solution, essentially, for businesses who are looking to upskill their employees and make sure their skills are both relevant and preparing them for what's next. And then we partner with education providers to do that, both higher ed institutions and also training providers and associations. And then what we do is we surface that learning in a really compelling way, creating pathways for learners to make sure that they can get exactly the skills that they need in sort of the format that works for them, right? Because these are all, these are all working learners. Their learning has to fit into their lives. So a lot of obviously asynchronous online learning, a lot of shorter form upskilling that happens, and then we, we focus very deeply on the ROI for the business, right? So are you attracting more growth minded, more skilled workers who are interested in taking advantage of education benefits? Are you retaining those at higher rates? Are you advancing those so what are your internal promotional pathways? Or also that matrix of, are you filling sideways, those skill gaps and harder to hire areas? Because some of, even though, even though the employment market is definitely softening somewhat, the essential skills, piece of this is not. It is hard to find the right skilled people for a lot of jobs right now. It's been, it's been an interesting journey. The thing that was newer to me is I never worked at an educational technology company before, right? And so I've learned so much about the platform and the data structure behind it, which is really fascinating. We use these live APIs to make sure the skills that we're bringing in are really the ones that are needed, are associated with the right careers, aligned to the right courses and certificates and degrees and pathways. So it's been a really exciting journey, and I think what we're doing is really at the forefront. And I believe every company is going to offer education as a benefit, not a reimbursement model, but they're going to, literally, they have to, like companies need to invest in. Learning if they want to have that edge.  Julian: Sasha, what are some of the challenges and successes you're seeing in your work? Sasha: I would say successes is that everyone is interested in doing this. This is absolutely we are skating to where the puck is going to be. In my mind, that's a that's a double funny, because our company is Canadian, and I know absolutely nothing about hockey, so I would say… Julian: Give Sasha more money, please, Canadians. Sasha: Yeah. So we've learned a lot that this is a high demand area. I think it's much harder to do the translation piece right, and also the evolution of what higher education needs to do to have that immediate relevancy for companies, that's that's a deeper challenge. And so we've had great luck in partnering with institutions that are more ready for that evolution have become evolving already, understand the needs of adult learners differently. Are able to support adult learners differently, and you both know this from SNHU, like the importance of that advising for retention and really looking deep at how you support people for whom education is not their primary endeavor, right? Their work and their families are so that's a different level of challenge. And it's, it feels like we have the opportunity to help transform this space which is really exciting. It's scary. Sometimes it's challenging, but it's also super exciting that you get to sort of be part of building the future. Kaitlin: Absolutely well. And you mentioned Sasha, the, you know, the speed at which everything is moving, one, I mean, from rapid tech advancements to a rapid upskilling needs and you know, and really not even knowing, maybe in some cases, like, what are the skills that our employees are going to need in the next year or two? How do you, how do you think about working within that landscape? Like, what are, you know, do you have any principles that you follow, or, you know, I don't know a framework through which you think about. Sasha: Oh, wow. I don't think, I don't think I'm quite that advanced there. How 'bout we just call it approaches? I actually think this is where the unique human component comes in. Think this is where there's a certain amount of, you know, skill set, data and keywords associated with data and skills taxonomies. There's a certain amount of that, that is that cannot go and complete that circle, right? I think this is where, in fact, we're learning that we need to work with the technology differently and also the humans differently, because the algorithms and the results of what's coming out of AI are it's only as good as the conversations you before it, during it, after it, how it's implemented, how there's a difference between what's written in the job description that you're pulling the data from, and what the individual actually does on a day to day basis. Because sometimes that changes really, really fast, right? What you call a project manager at a company, if the company is larger, they could have a dozen job descriptions for a project manager, and some of that could be specific domain related knowledge, but there is a certain amount of methodology that you would want to be universal, and how you articulate that and what level of proficiency you need someone to be able to perform at sometimes those are very legitimate conversations that need to happen, and L&D departments are some. Some are incredibly advanced at this. Some just don't have the capacity to do all of it themselves, like they have the skill sets themselves, but they have, you know, a person doing L&D for an entire manufacturing division, right? So sometimes we're capacity building in that, in that respect, but that whole like that, working from a human perspective, I think, has never been more important. And I think a necessary component of that is, what are those durable skills? How do we need to communicate with each other? How do we, how do we work in teams together, in a very different way, where we are more technology supported than ever before. I don't care if, like, you're working in a warehouse, or you're, you know, setting up a construction site, or you're working for a software company, you are using technology differently, and that requires both different skill sets, but moving and learning faster than ever before.  Kaitlin: Yeah, it's that absolutely and it also makes me think about, you know, as we think about when you're talking about, like an L&D leader in a company, you know, how do they also take into account, from an adult learner perspective, all the skills that we all already have, right? Like, one of those other unique elements of working with adult learners is they already have a ton of skills. They're bringing existing domain knowledge and skills to the table, and how do you recognize that or unearth that as part of their lived experience and part of what they draw with them to their next role and build that into their L&D plan? It's just you know, another level of complexity.  Sasha: And How do you even know, right? Like, you know as a manager, you're not sitting there reviewing everyone's resumes who already works there. That's not something right now. And when someone does raise their hand, I still remember this from when I was at SNHU, so I led the course production team there, and, you know, we did a massive implementation of Brightspace. You all remember this? And there was a young lady who was, he hadn't been there very long, and she just came up to me, she raised her hand, she came up to me, and she was like, you know, I have a degree in UX design, and I think there are some things that we could do, you know, to improve the experience in the courses. And I thought, hmm. And this was considered, like, almost a decade ago, right? Like eight, nine years ago, before everyone had UX all over place and experts in that space. And I was like, well, that's interesting. Well, let's see what some options are, right? And then two years later, when I left, we had a mini UX team, and SNHU now has the much, much bigger UX team on the learning side as well, like this is where I would never have known she had that skill set if she hadn't just walked up to me and told me. So how do we surface those experiences for L&D leaders, for managers to make sure that We can, we can fully leverage the talent we even already have, right? I think that's a really good point.  Julian: So Sasha, can you speak to share an example or two of current or recent partners that you think are doing this very well? Sasha: One of our clients is a rather large retailer, and they actually did a whole analysis of sort of what talent they currently had, what skills were they projecting were going to be needed in the next couple of years, down to what specific positions were they having problems filling now, but were they projecting having more challenges in the future? And then that was all information that they really use to inform their selections of what to put into their marketplace, which is, is our platform essentially provides the ability to register for things based on skill sets or careers and even down to a specific skill that someone wants to develop, and so they very intentionally curated their learning opportunities and even structured their policies in a very intelligent way that enabled people to develop the skills that were most important to them, but also most important overall to the employees. So, you know, the French is a very important part of the culture in Canada, obviously, because of Quebec, but also just in terms of, you know, doing business, it is one of the national languages. And so learning French as a Second Language for people who aren't native French speakers is really important. And that was one of the skill sets they wanted to extend to all employees, even though not in Quebec themselves. So that was something that was really important. I would say that, from the sourcing perspective, another one of our clients had very specific needs in the energy sector, and so that's where we can go to our education partners and say, Hey, what do you have available in this specific space, which is also one of the reasons that we play in in very specific we call them ICPs, ideal customer profiles, and we focus on certain industries, and we intentionally do not do other industries. There are, there are industries, specifically healthcare. There are other companies in this space that really do that. They do that very well. They do that all day long. The market itself doesn't need another player in that space, and it's complex, it's highly regulated. There's clinical sites, all sorts of complications. So we're really leaning into the types of businesses where we're going to be most aligned and most successful, which is, you know, retail energy manufacturing, high tech manufacturing, construction management. There's a lot of. Yes, and interestingly, professional services, for some reason, we have a lot of interest from financial firms, which is sort of just happened organically. But those are, it's like this nexus of supply and demand and motivation all centered around the skills. That's like the skills is sort of the core part. It is the DNA of everything we do.  Kaitlin: Sasha, one question that we like to ask everyone who comes on this podcast, given that it's called workforces, is based on your lessons learned. We'd love to hear practical steps that our audience can take away to become forces in implementing programs or products that are at the intersection of higher ed and industry. So if you have a couple of, like, practical steps, or, you know, things that you would recommend that are tried and true or or emerging for you, that would be great.  Sasha: The first thing would be, look at the data. And I would start with sort of demand based signals in the marketplace. Some of those are very like, are almost data sets you can just grab, like, right, like, you can just grab data from Lightcast or a number of places that follows job data. And then you can, you can also grab data on who is enrolling and what type of program, what programs are being developed at colleges and universities. That data is available. But I think enrollment data is really important, because you have to look at the demand on all sides of this equation. Colleges and universities want to develop programs in certain areas. They may not be looking at all of those demand signals. I know I have interpreted demand signals poorly in the past. So it doesn't necessarily matter what you think about the data. It matters what the data is telling you. You know, the best data wins. Best interpretation of the data wins. And sometimes you get it right, sometimes you don't, so you got to pivot fast. But there, there is definitely a bias towards perception in any field, because developing learning is not cheap, usually not quick and hard to assess. Well, it's even more important that you look at the right data and try to interpret it, and then be willing to pivot if that's not something that that is working, I would say listen to your audience on all sides, is the second thing so that look at the data first, quantitative data always super helpful. But then listen to your audience, and it shouldn't be the people that you surround yourself with day in and day out. It should be people out of your comfort zone, you know, friends of friends of friends in the field, who go farther away from where you are. You need to triangulate data, right? I think in higher ed, on the higher ed side, specifically, we listen to ourself a little bit too much, and we don't listen to employers enough, or we don't believe employers. That's, that's my favorite mistake. Is employers will tell you I need this skill set, and then sometimes, in academia, we're like, but we think you need this skill set. Well, that doesn't exactly work, right? So I would say that's the second thing, is making sure that what you're building is relevant to both groups. And I would say, from a philosophical perspective, it's really important to advocate that those two things are not that the doing what is right for business does not mean not doing what is right for the individual, because part of our job is to make individuals successful across a variety of environments, and we're not doing people any favors if we are not preparing them for what employers need. Because, like, you know, good jobs, what is the most impactful thing we can do for our communities? I would say is good jobs for people. And then the other thing I would say is this is very practical, probably a little less PC, but know how to navigate your environment, because all of these environments are incredibly political in and of themselves. And I don't necessarily mean politics in terms of Republicans, Democrats, though, I guess, in some cases that's also involved. But these are complex environments, within universities, within organizations that have, you know, competing demands and competition for resources and different power structures, different organizational structures, and so to pay attention to those, because no matter what you do, you have to navigate an environment to be successful. And I don't think people always do that intentionally. So this would be, I would say that's. Things in order to really move forward. And if I can remember those three things, it would be, look, look at the data, right? And follow the data, you know, talk to people who aren't necessarily believing the same things you do or aren't in your space, right? And then the third thing I would say is, like politics and power structures, which we don't, we don't necessarily think enough about from a change management perspective, right? If you want to make change in the world, you have to understand where you're starting from, what the levers are, and how you get to different, hopefully better, right? Not just different. Julian: Well,  and you are asking, you know, in so many of these cases, you're asking pretty complex institutions, you know, sort of visual institutions, and the employers to change the way they do things. And that's very political, just in and of itself. Sasha: It totally can be for sure and for sure, and even departmentally, like departments within the same colleges, within universities. And most colleges and universities have very wide missions, right, with some notable exceptions, but they have missions that incorporate, you know, teaching and like, community involvement, usually some sort of outreach, sometimes serving military students, also research, by the way, also government grants, by the way. You know, it's, it's a lot of priorities to have all at once. Julian: It really is, and it's, and this is a real challenge and focused kind of work.  Sasha: It is, and it's over time too, right? It's, it's focused work over a period of time. And if we don't build it though, if we don't build it together, it will be built without us, right? If we don't build it together as a community across educational institutions, associations and employers, I do worry that relevance will be lacking.  Julian: So speaking of over time, as we, as we, as we begin to want, not that we're over time, but over time. How can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work over time?  Sasha: Oh, look at that way to set me up. Okay, well, we do have, I work with an amazing team at skills wave, and so we are going to be sort of publishing articles and blogging. I am all over LinkedIn most of the time. I amplify great things other people are doing, and then, and then I would say, just watch to see us grow, because it is sort of the results at the end of the day that are those market signals, but that everybody gets to play in this sandbox, right? Like we all have a part to play in it. So I look forward to learning a lot from the community as well.  Julian: Well. Thank you so much, Sasha for taking the time to talk with us, and you know you've offered all sorts of great insights and takeaways. And we look forward to following your work as the wave unfolds or rolls out or whatever. Sasha: Yeah, no, I like it. You could surf the wave. You could, you know, ride the wave. There's a lot of different wave related analogies, but thank you so much for having me. I appreciate it.  Kaitlin: Thank you, Sasha, that's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We are also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces.info or on Apple, Amazon and Spotify. Please subscribe, like and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Brad Turner-Little, President and CEO of the National Association of Workforce Boards (NAWB), shares his vision for NAWB and his commitment to building a workforce system that empowers individuals and strengthens communities. He discusses the challenges and opportunities facing workforce boards in the current landscape, emphasizing the need for innovation, adaptability, and strong leadership. Brad also highlights the importance of collaboration between business, education, and community partners in driving economic vitality and creating pathways to opportunity for all. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin: Workforces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Well, Julian, I can't believe we're well on our way with season three.  Julian: I know the season is really flying by and there are so many innovative initiatives and voices to highlight.  Kaitlin: No kidding. And it's amazing to see the themes that are emerging through these conversations. One theme that we're exploring this season and looking forward to discussing further today is really around rethinking and retooling the organizations that drive workforce, education and talent development.  Julian: Yeah, we have a lot to unpack here, and we have just the guests to do it. Today, we're excited to connect with Brad Turner Little, who leads one of the nation's most important workforce development organizations, the National Association of Workforce Boards. Brad is Nob's president and CEO. He's been a strong voice and leader in the field of workforce development and the nonprofit sector. Prior to taking on this role, he honed his expertise and leadership skills in various key positions at Goodwill Industries International and Easterseals, most recently as Vice President of Strategy and Network Experience at Goodwill. Brad graduated Wake Forest University and holds a Master of Divinity degree in Christian Social Ministry from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and resides in Damascus, Maryland. It is great to have you on the pod, Brad, particularly as you're closing in on your first year as head of knob. I feel like we're getting you at kind of a, you know, an important milestone moment. Welcome.  Brad Turner-Little: So go Deeks for my Wake Forest alumni who may be listening. And once a Hornet, always a Hornet, part of the swarm for Damascus High School. If there's anybody by chance that may be connected to Damascus, Maryland, who might be listening as well. So, so. They'll always be a part of the swarm and go dekes. But it's really, I'm excited to be here. The conversations that you guys have been having via Work Forces, I think are really, really critical. Just very recently, I heard this yesterday, I was in a conversation with Secretary Su at the Department of Labor, where she was talking about the one and a half conversations around the impact of AI and how that's impacting workers and how to not just create safety and security and protections for workers as impacts are evolving, but to think more broadly about the ways that AI and be it generative AI or other more historical artificial intelligence are impacting the way that work happens. And one of the things that I brought up in that conversation is this is to your point, I think, in terms of, Kaitlin, as you were mentioning, the retooling. Right, the retooling of workforce, the retooling of education, those sorts of things, right, is the need for investment in our nation's workforce infrastructure, just like we are investing in the physical infrastructure in that we need to be thinking about how AI and other technologies can transform the way that the public workforce system does its business and not just how job matching occurs and skill matching, but like really think hard about redoing the financial models of the public workforce system to stretch resources further, to better steward them, yes. But there's an opportunity in the moment, I think, to view the nation's public workforce system, local workforce boards, the three, you know, there's nearly 600 state and local workforce boards across the country and all the territories. There's about 3,000 America's job centers that all are sort of branded a little bit different in each state, but to really invest in the backbone of those things so that they can support the evolution of economies that are happening in regions all across the country. As different industries are transforming, that's requiring different skills and competencies for workers. There needs to be an investment in the public workforce system in order to support its ability to effectively serve businesses and all of our neighbors across the country. It's a very timely topic for you guys to be thinking about and having conversations around because there's a retooling sort of theoretical construct. I know Julian, you and I have had conversations about this in the past, right? There's a theoretical esoteric conversation about that. And then there's a very practical conversation about on the ground, what does transformation actually need to entail? What do we need to be investing in? How do we need to think about the execution of supporting businesses and talent coming together in fundamentally different ways that leverage lessons that we're seeing and learning from other parts of the economy into the way we think about preparing workers and connecting workers to career opportunities.  Kaitlin: Yeah, no, we're with you there, Brad. And I think appreciate that introduction. And I think building off of what Julian said regarding your bio, we'd love to hear a little bit more about your background and how you approach your work, especially, like you said, in light of this very complex present state that we all live in.  Brad: I've had the opportunity, Julian and I have known each other for a number of years, I don't think because we're in podcasts. I don't know if ultimately it will be video or not, but Julian and I are both of an age where we've known each other for all of our time.  Julian: Okay, okay.  Brad: But, you know, so my career piece really is sort of all been grounded in and sort of centered on a fundamental belief in the power and dignity of work to transform lives and communities. In the intro you mentioned that I do have a master's of entity degree but it's focused in Christian social ministry and inside that is the important role that economic empowerment and economic freedom plays in the human experience as it relates to dignity and Contribution to community support a family. I think there's a really important element to the human experience to be able to contribute through work. And so I got my career has all been built on how can I think about sort of on the ground and at a systems level, what can we do better tomorrow than we did today that can create better ways for people, for individuals to provide for themselves and their families better tomorrow than they did today? And it's one of the things we talk about now here at NAWB because we don't do direct service delivery, right? We're not helping job seekers and businesses come together in Tulsa, Oklahoma. That's not our role. We serve and support and represent local workforce boards that do that. But it's important that we here at NNAWB ground our work in a commitment that more kids are gonna have dinner on the table tomorrow night than they do tonight. That's what we do this work for. When it all boils down, from overhauling public workforce infrastructure, through to thinking about building certain strategies in our space. You know, we talk about sector strategies and career pathing and all the, you know, and skills first hiring and advancement to transform the way that talent acquisition happens, right? All of that for me personally is grounded in a deep commitment. And I'll say it again, to make sure that more kids have dinner tomorrow night than they do tonight. Because that's really when it hits the ground and that's what it means. You know, I've done lots of different things to support sort of directly in the public workforce system and in partnership with the public workforce system over the course of my career. And it will be September, September 5th will be one year. So it's currently August the 6th. So I have little bit less than a month in this role. And it's been really exciting here. You know the National Association of Workforce Boards will be 50 years old in 2029. And we were founded by a lovely gentleman. I know Julian and I know Bob Knight well. And Kaitlin, I don't know if you have, but I have had the opportunity to meet Bob Knight, but Bob founded this organization nearly 50 years ago with a vision of really advocating for the public workforce system. And over the years, it's been led by wonderful people, most recently by Ron Painter for about 15 years. But as I've come in, we've been working on building on that legacy, but really thinking in new ways about how we can not just represent local workforce boards, but how we can serve, support, and represent. And so we're thinking about how do we build products, how do we deliver services, how do we build relationships that create value for local workforce boards to be able to have the kind of impact that they are deeply committed to in their communities. So we're building new capabilities here to better serve and support. And I would also argue, ultimately, to better represent the interest of the public workforce system with Congress, with the administration, and with other stakeholders. But it's a growth period, it's a transformation period for us here at NAWB, and it's been really exciting. It's been very challenging work, but it's the most fun thing I've ever done in my career. It's over 25 years in workforce development for me, and it's been very rewarding, and I'm excited about our future here.  Julian: It is very exciting, Brad, and they're certainly lucky to have you. I mean, you've been a force in the field for many years since I've known you, and as you know, as we know, the world is changing. And as we've discussed, there's a lot of need for retooling in all aspects of workforce development. This is just this constant theme, I guess. And we try to kind of keep it, you know, keep it where you want it, which is to keep it real and practical. So it's really, it'd be really interesting to hear you describe some of the very specific steps you're taking as you lead NAWB into the future.  Brad: Yeah, so I got, you know, we've really landed on three primary strategies that I wanna talk through a little bit as it relates to how we believe we can, in partnership with our members, better serve, support, and represent them. And then I'm gonna talk about one area that that really hits the ground and that we believe is critical to the evolution of this organization. So the first three things are, number one, we want to really lean in and understand and help advance what moves the needle. And so as a business, as a small business, even though I'm an association, I think it's important to understand, like I'm a small business, right? And I got to think about what my business capabilities are and how do I want to build those things to create value for my customer set, right? And so I need to, we've got to build capabilities to listen hard to what the local workforce board's experiences are, what really drives change and impact, and then find ways to not just understand it and codify it, but spread it across the country, right? After 25 years of system level type work, I've come to the place where the construct of scale, I think, becomes a problem oftentimes in our conversations. Because when I think about scale, like what comes to mind is, like, you know, how do, you know, when Samsung releases a new phone, they think about scale. How much market share can they garner, right? Of all the cell phones that are out there, right? We wanna scale this model. We wanna scale and approach. But there's such, you know, and you guys have known this, right? You've experienced it over the years, like, like the dynamics and the context and the environment and the politics of, I mentioned Tulsa earlier, like they're different than Tallahassee and they're different than Tacoma. I love using T examples because they're strong alliterations there, right? But they are different. But if I think about a concept of spreading things, right? And when you think about the ways that, you know, technologies have and the viralness of trending and X, it used to be Twitter and other sort of platforms, things spread, people get excited about it. They wanna grab onto it and then make it their own and build on it and make it better and things spread over time, right? And I think that because it's human driven. Right, and so I want us to think about how do we as NAWB help spread things across our nation's workforce infrastructure, right? And so that helps us think about what kind of products do we need to be building? How do we build things that are agile and flexible and customizable to make sense, but have some foundational sort of components that are really important to think about? So as an example, right? So as opposed to...Here's the actual, like, take this operating model and move it from Tulsa to Tacoma, right? Here is the guiding conversational framework for players to have, to come to an agreement about a problem or a situation or an opportunity. So the conversational framework can be taken from community to community, but the actual conversation is different. You see the difference there? So it's not telling people this worked in Tulsa, so it's gonna have to work in, I'm gonna switch it up, Buffalo. Because there's a natural resistance to that. So just circumvent the resistance and create an experience that people can have together where they can develop a shared aspiration for their community. Because people act locally and they wanna do things locally on the ground, but they wanna do it together. And so I have found that, you know, as opposed to here's a model, we're gonna move it from space to space. If you can take an approach that allows a community to come together and build out a shared aspiration, they'll figure it out. They'll figure out how to move the needle and they'll get other communities excited about that. And they're gonna wanna know, how did you have that conversation? How did you get there? Well, it began by us having, you know, having a structured experience around these sorts of issues that led us to this place. So I'm super excited about sort of part one. Part two is we need to be deeply committed to helping our system skate to where the puck is going. Right, in the words of the great Wayne Gretzky, although I probably butchered his quote. But that's another thing too, is that our system, you know, I mean, yes, we've, you know, the amount of federal investment in the public welfare system has, you know, has gone down annually for, you know, years. So we, I mean, that's probably part of our reality moving forward, which means we have to get more creative. We have to be more innovative with how we do the business. And I started off with thinking about, you know, my comments to the Acting Secretary. We've got to invest in experimentation around how boards operate. And I think that's really, really critical that we at NAWB, we have a unique view, right? We sit at a balcony level. We're not at the orchestra level. We can sort of see things a little differently. And I think it's our responsibility to sort of gaze out over the horizon and sort of identify things that can be, that we need to experiment in to help boards better achieve their missions on the ground in communities, local workforce boards to really be able to do that as they bring business and talent together. So there's the operational piece. There's also things like, you know, we're really involved in the skills first hiring and advancement, you know, sort of work that I know many, you know, National Governors Association, Walmart, Foundation, lots of different groups are kind of in this space around thinking about what does it mean to fundamentally transform how a job seeker communicates with the value they can create for a business and how the business understands what are the actual competencies that we need to do a certain job. And oftentimes, a degree requirement is a false equivalency to competency needed to do work. But there's so much more than just that part of skills, you know, skills, skills first agenda. So anyway, I think, you know, but that's on the horizon. So we need to be in that conversation and in that space. And then lastly, you know, I mentioned this a little bit earlier, but I do think it's really important that that we that we at NAWB align with and engage with people, corporations, partners, whatever it may be, that where we can really discern a shared aspiration around economic vitality in communities, right? That benefits business and all of our neighbors alike. Right, so I think those, so, and that influences like how we wanna approach, you know, the relationships that we're in and what are we trying to achieve, right? And ultimately, if this is about having a thriving local economy, I think we can also rally around that because that's going to create more opportunities for people. And ultimately, that's going to mean more kids are going to have dinner tomorrow night than they do tonight. And so, you know, let's think creatively about how we do that. So anyway, those are kind of the big three pillars of our focus as we build and as we evolve as an organization. Absolutely retaining sort of our engagements around the representation part for workforce boards. In this particular moment in time, Congress is considering the reauthorization of the federal legislation that sort of sits on top of this whole system called the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. There's appropriations discussions going on. So we're deeply involved in those pieces, but we believe that there's so much more we can be doing to support boards. And that's really those first three pieces. The other thing that I wanted, and where this begins to really come together for me, Kaitlin, is in our deep commitment to helping build and equip leaders in the public workforce system. So local executive directors, local CEOs of workforce boards and the Boards themselves, sort of equipping them and building competencies and skills that really align with the kind of leader you need in the overall economy, right? One that is certainly able to execute from complying with regulatory frameworks or expectations in law, but really has competencies in the space of understanding how to navigate change, how to think differently about agility within an organization, and how to do organizational development that builds trust within the team, right? Because ultimately, the competency sets and the skills that we're gonna need 10 years from now, like that's really hard to project. There's gonna be technologies that don't exist or whatever, but I can guarantee you that, you know, one thing that will be needed in the workplace 10 years from now is trust. So how do we build trust with one another within teams and how do we help leaders within the workforce system build those kinds of competencies to do community engagement, to think strategically to lean into vision crafting and aspiration development and then build strategy in those spaces, right? So, you know, we're thinking hard and working with our members to understand from a professional development perspective, what does the executive director of the future look like and how do we build them, right? How do we prepare people for that and build the right competencies for leaders in communities that are responsible for stewarding our nation's public system. So, you know, we've got some big things that are on the docket, but, you know, it's a, we need to. The public workforce system deserves us taking on big things because they do big, important work every single day. And we need to support them and serve them and represent them in new and value add ways. And so this is what we're working on here at NAWB.  Kaitlin: Brad, I think you began to touch upon both a challenge and an opportunity that you're seeing right around leadership roles and what does it look like, what are the skills that are needed as we think about the future of leading workforce development initiatives and models. Curious to hear a little bit more about what are some of the other challenges and successes that you're seeing in your work, especially, you know, as you're about to reach that one year point at NAWB, you know, we see, you know, different potential challenges like being, you know, resistance and regulatory considerations. But I mean, would love to hear more about what you're seeing both on the challenge side, but also, you know, what do you think is working?  Brad: You know, from where I sit, you know, as the new leader of this organization, and we're not that large, I mean, we're 10, 12 people, we're not a big organization, but you know, when I think about sort of what a local workforce board sort of leaders experience is and some of the challenges they're facing, certainly the resource question is a big one. You know, we know that in our world, we owe funding, you know, has gone down on the appropriations process for decades. And as a result, because, you know, when you do see those great examples, I think of the sort of how to lean into opportunity. It's about 60% of local workforce boards now have spun off outside of government to create their own nonprofit. And what that does is, amongst a variety of things, it creates an ability to access capital beyond government funding so that you can actually break things, weave investment from philanthropy, other government funding, foundation investment, those kind of, programmatic investments. Like you can think about capital in a different way. And so I think, you know, we've seen Boards, we've seen executive directors go on that journey that the payoff is being able to have greater flexibility and access to more capital, to be able to respond to business need and job seeker, career builder need in community. So I think that, you know, that's a great example of kind of there is innovation happening in the network. It doesn't sound like that's like, that's not a big thing to think about going from being a government into a nonprofit, but it's actually a pretty big thing. Because it's responsive to how, you know, trying to think about how does, as a local leader, how do I create access to more resources and how do I create agility within my own organization to be able to be responsive to me? So I think that's an interesting example of kind of both the challenge and the responding response to flipping it and seeing it as an opportunity to think differently.  Kaitlin: Well, and it sounds like that's something that's like spreadable, right? Like maybe not seeable, but spreadable, as you said earlier in your different chain.  Brad: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. And there are some instances where that's not, you know, that's not practical. Doesn't make sense, but a lot of places it does. And I think there's some clearly momentum behind that. And we've actually got some product coming out soon that will be, that sort of reflects those experiences of boards that have gone through that process that can help boards ask better questions as they're considering it, right? So that's one piece. Another piece gets to our reality that inside, and you mentioned a little bit some of the challenges from compliance and regulation and those sorts of things, but there's also a bigger reality that I think many of us as leaders sort of are trying to navigate, right? Which is the, what I bring and what my team brings to work with them every day, in terms of their experience of the world around them and a growing sense of frustration, a growing sense of divisiveness, a growing sense of brokenness, just in the systems and a disbelief and an inability to trust that tomorrow is gonna be better than today, right? People feel that. The military had come up with the VUCA environment, right? Several years ago, to be able to understand our post-Cold War navigation, right? Now, change management experts tell us we've moved past VUCA, now we're in Bonnie, right? And in the beginning, part of Bonnie is a sense of brokenness, of fracturedness. How do we as leaders lead teams who are bringing that with them every day? And so it requires us as leaders to think about how am I building trust? How am I thinking about empathy? How am I thinking about alignment? How am I thinking about creating safety and security in the workplace in very different types of ways that then the leaders have had to in the past on top of, right, on top of the state's coming in to do a compliance review, or the Feds are coming to do, you know, so you have those requirements of the business expectations, right? But there's also, you're doing it in a context, and you're supporting businesses and job seekers that are inside an economy which is so rapidly transforming, where we talked about a little bit earlier, where competency sets are gonna be needed three years from now. We have no idea what those are going to be because technology is changing so quickly. So how do you build systems which can absorb that rate of change and supports for people and businesses alike that can absorb that and can create value in those sort of contexts? Those are massive changes and challenges for leaders. I think there are lessons out there that we can learn from the private sector. I think there are lessons out there that we can learn from other associations that can be informative for Work for Sports who are in that context, and for leaders in that context who are trying to understand, how do I help this organization achieve the impact it should and the mission that it's challenged with? Because it's critical work, right? Bringing business and talent together to create economic vitality is critical. And yet, there's so many sort of environmental pressures pushing on it and pushing on them. It can be really discouraging. It can be really disheartening, particularly when, you know, we sort of joke, right? It's really hard to explain what a workforce board is. And you get lost kind of in the detail of that. And then...And it's because it's not an understood sort of thing that can oftentimes feel like it's undervalued because it's hard to explain. And then it gets under resourced because it's undervalued and it can be really disheartening. And so I think it's also really important that we at NAWB as part of that representation charge is that like we communicate this work matters, right? There are people who are leaving time behind bars today that are going to one of those America's Job Centers across the country and are finding opportunity and are gonna be able to reunite with their family and provide for them in the way that they want because of America's Job Centers, because of local workforce boards. There are youth who have dropped out of school. There are 18-year-olds who have dropped out of school who are involved in programs operated by local workforce boards that are gonna see a path, are gonna find hope, right? There are older workers who are gonna be able to reconnect with the workforce and provide for themselves in ways that they haven't thought of before because of workforce boards. Like their work matters and it makes a difference. And I think it's really important to acknowledge that and to lean into it.  Julian: We like to ask the people we talk with on the show about practical steps folks can take and you really have touched on many for the workforce system. Our audience includes, you know, not just the workforce leaders, the workforce board leaders, but also all the other constituents, the employers, the post-secondary, the educators, the other community groups that need to work with them. Any, any words of wisdom with regard to practical steps, sort of the broader, cause you know, this is, it's going to take a village to do this clearly.  Brad: Right. Well, I think, well, I mean, both you and I know, Julian, that at its best, right, the public workforce system is actually, it represents the table where every one of the, the, the, the stakeholder, the members, your audience members, be they from the business community, from the education community, from the other government program community, community-based organizations, like the workforce board table is the table to come together. And that's actually the charge of a local workforce board is to bring those entities together in a community and understand what's happening in a local economy, understand the competencies that are needed to drive that local economy, understand how to build those competencies that are needed to drive a local economy, and then help bridge people in that local area to the competency building opportunities to really to lean into the jobs that are in that local economy, right? So, the most practical thing I could suggest, Julian, is that if your audience members are not connected to your local workforce board, call them. So you can find information about how to get in touch with your local workforce board at nawb.org. The Department of Labor at the federal level has a wonderful website, careeronestop.org, that you can go to, plug in your zip code, and you will find who's like...who the local workforce board is with contact information and make a phone call and say, hey, I wanna get connected, I wanna get involved. I think that at the most fundamental practical level, it's step up and engage in the building of the plan to drive economic vitality in your community. To me, that is a very practical, low risk step that folks can take that are in your audience today. So that's one. Two, I do think for folks who are in your audience that are listening in, that are from the business community or from the education community, one of the things that I have experienced and I've seen be so powerful is when community leaders sort of go through that dedicated sort of cohort experience, I'm sort of stepping aside from participating in the workforce board. But when you see programs like leadership, whatever, where you pick a city or pick a county, you know, you've got the leadership program. But going through those programs together and building strategy together, sort of setting aside sort of ego turf, brand build, whatever it is, for the betterment of the community is one of those places where I've seen real transformation happen across the country. Number three, though, would be, and this is a little bit about kind of the initial conversation that I talked about recently at the Department of Labor around sort of worker voice and those kinds of things, but I've also, when real transformation happens and people find hope in community, either for the growth of their business or hope for their family, is when they turn outward. And this is a phrase that I've learned from the great work that the Harwood Institute does, Rich Harwood and the Harwood Institute for Public Innovation, where decisions are made not in the boardroom, but in the community with trust and experience and the betterment of the other versus the sustaining of a system. So when you're able to not just incorporate different voices or perspectives in a big plan, but create a context in which people are, whether it's a business and a community college, a chancellor of the workforce development program, where they're given the ability to try small things. I'm a big believer, Julian, in the Pebble Theory of Change. Big believer in the Pebble Theory. I've yet to see a big, except for the New Deal, but a big macro level plan. There's so much inertia in systems. There's so much inertia. It's so hard to move those things. And oftentimes people get forgotten, and people of color, people with disabilities, women. You know, they're LGBTQ, people get left out, small business, rural community, like, you know, in those spaces, right? But the Pebble Theory of Change is that people get so sort of, I don't wanna say fed up, but the level of frustration with the current circumstance, you're willing to do this, work with somebody to do this one small thing, to see if change is possible. And that invites another two or three people, this is like the old, the double mint commercial, whatever, you know, tell people, they come through people, right? But the pebble theory is that these little small pebbles thrown into the pond, you throw enough of them in, and you throw them in a frequency where there's more and more and more, and I know your listeners can't see me, but my hand is throwing the pebbles in more quickly and more quickly, right? Then suddenly all those little ripples add up to a big wave of transformation. Right? And they're all headed generally in the same direction. Right? And there's, that's when I think real power happens. So that would be the third thing. Real practical. Just do a small thing, a small thing, set up an internship for four kids to see how your business operates with your school system. Right? You don't have to launch a full-grown apprenticeship strategy though that would be lovely. But like set up a small apprenticeship where four kids get to come in, right? Um, you know, open the invite, you know, we're getting ready in the summertime, but next summer, right? Talk with your, your, your local education agency, whoever your school system is there, right? And say, Hey, listen, I want to invite, you know, I want to invite four or five teachers in to see my business in operation for two or three weeks so they can see it in operation and they can understand like they're preparing kids to go into the world of work. What that actually means, right? And that is not saying that teaching is not work. I have deep, deep respect, married into, and have had deep appreciation for teachers and in our public education system. But give some exposure there. I think those are really practical, easy things to do. Low risk, things that can be done to help understand, build an understanding and build an aspiration within your community for what do we want? What do we want for our kids? What do we want for our seniors? What do we want for all of our neighbors? You know, and I think there can be real power in that and they don't have to be, and it doesn't have to be a big, huge, macro level plan. It's then just trying small things together and building trust and building momentum. Those are things that I think would be the three things that I would say.  Kaitlin: Well, thank you for those steps, Brad. They are incredibly practical and I think there is something, there's so much to be said for thinking about starting small because that's often how the big things do eventually happen, right? So really appreciate your thoughts and insights there and learning so much more about NAWB today. Please listen in to Workforce Central as well. And I guess I would ask you as we close out today's conversation, Brad, are there any other ways that our listeners can continue to learn more about NAWB's work and follow what you're doing?  Brad: Yeah, I mean, you can certainly visit our website, which is NAWB.org. I will tell you that it is, I mean, I don't know how evergreen our podcast will be, but this is the fall of 2024 and we're going through our website reboot. So it'll look a little bit different later this fall. But you can sign up for newsletters, sign up to be part of our advocacy work, sign up to be, you know, so you can get information about our nation's workforce system and sort of learn more in that way. And you can get connected to your local workforce system, which at the end of the day, Kaitlin, I mean, I love it when people sort of click on stuff and sign up for our newsletters, but actually what moves the needle is when they get connected locally and they get involved. I'd much rather have that than, you know, a big email list on my side. I'd much rather have all those folks connected to their local workforce boards and really leaning in together.  Kaitlin: Great, well, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today, Brad. And we appreciate the insights and learning more about the direction that you're taking in NAWB, it's super exciting and we look forward to continuing to watch it all unfold.  Julian: Just to echo Kaitlin, thank you so much for joining us. It's great to hear about your plans. I love the grounded grassroots nature. It really is about doing stuff and...I do think the boards are so much more of a switching point for everything you're describing than people realize and can be more and more so, and certainly under your leadership will be for sure.  Brad: Thanks, y'all. I've enjoyed the time today. Thank you for inviting me to be a part of your conversations as part of Work Forces. And I will also look forward to hearing sort of your future versions of this conversation with other folks. Thank you so much.  Kaitlin: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at Workforces.info or on Apple, Amazon, and Spotify. Please subscribe, like, and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Kristen Fox, CEO of the Business-Higher Education Forum (BHEF), joins Work Forces to delve into the critical intersection of business and higher education.  With extensive experience in education, digital learning, and workforce development, Kristen brings a contemporary lens to BHEF's mission of creating inclusive solutions for talent challenges. In this episode, Kristen shares BHEF's strategic focus areas, including illuminating skill gaps, developing new work-based learning models, and convening action-oriented forums. She also emphasizes the importance of strong leadership, clear signaling mechanisms, and effective intermediaries in fostering successful cross-sector collaboration. Kristen shares valuable insights into the practical steps needed to bridge the gap between education and employment and create a more inclusive and agile talent pipeline, ultimately connecting learners in the higher education ecosystem to opportunity and sharing what's working to achieve greater impact together.  Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine. And we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. We're excited to kick off today's conversation by welcoming Kristen Fox, CEO of the Business-Higher Education Forum, or BHEF, to the podcast. It feels like conversations at the intersection of business and higher ed are more critical than ever, especially as we think about the future of work and learning.  Julian: Yeah, I couldn't agree more, Kaitlin. The world is changing so rapidly. And Kristen brings us a contemporary lens on what works. And I'm looking forward to hearing how she's applying this lens to the BHEF, which has been around since the late seventies, I believe.  Kaitlin: Yeah, same here, Julian. To provide a bit of background, the Business-Higher Education Forum is a national nonprofit that brings together business and higher education leaders to create inclusive solutions for talent challenges. In Kristen's role as CEO, she brings 20 years of leadership experience working at the intersection of education, digital learning, and workforce development. Kristen has advised foundations, institutions, and companies on the design and implementation of successful strategies that drive impact, growth, and sustainability. She's also published research on the impact of digital learning and AI in higher ed, and prior to her role at BHEF, Kristen held leadership positions at Titan Partners, Northeastern University, and Edge Adventures. She holds a BA in International Relations and Chinese from Colgate University and an MA in International Affairs and Economic Development from the School of Global Policy and Strategy at the University of California, San Diego. Thank you for joining us on the podcast today, Kristen.  Kristen Fox: Thank you for having me. It's great to be with both of you.  Julian: It's great to be with you as well, Kristen. So to kick us off, if you would, please tell us more about your background and how you approach your work at BHEF.  Kristen: So as you mentioned a little bit in your intro, I've spent the last 20 years or so working across the higher education sector. And I'll give a little bit more detail around that because I think it's important to the lens that I bring and part of the things that I'm excited about and think are so important about the work that we're doing at the Business-Higher Education Forum. But I worked in three kinds of types of roles. So in consulting or advisory roles, in leadership roles at an institution, and at membership types of organizations, all focused on issues related to workforce development, digital learning, innovation, student success, and equity. And in consulting in those roles, I had the opportunity to really get on hundreds of campuses, both two-year and four-year institutions over a long period of time across many different states and regions, and to work with different regional and sector business leaders through that lens as well, and also to work at philanthropies as they've considered impact and scale across the space, as well as at tech firms and organizations as well. That's given me a really powerful 360 degree view of the shared challenges and effective and ineffective solutions that leaders, faculty, and staff are really grappling with and behind closed doors. And one of my key takeaways there has been there's always a unique local flavor, right? So labor market challenges, to institutional strategies, et cetera. But there's a lot more commonality there than difference in terms of what we're trying to solve for. In addition, I've also had the opportunity to work at an institution, Northeastern University, with a significant focus on workforce alignment and experiential learning. And some of my efforts there were really focused on leading innovation related to making the traditional, really strong and effective co-op experiential learning model more accessible through something we launched called the Experiential Network, which is now more project-based learning online, connecting part-time learners, non-traditional or the new majority learner to different types of opportunities, for example. And then in addition, I did that with faculty, with advisors, and really working to support systemic change throughout the institution, really giving me a sense of, you know, how you work collaboratively in traditional institutions to more agilely align to workforce, to drive innovation, and to also engage employers effectively throughout the process. And so, you know, that experience of working to drive change within an institution has also been really powerful, right, in understanding some of the different dynamics that both can support or prevent change and innovation. And then early in my career, I worked in an organization that developed a pretty unique membership model approach that brought together institutions for shared learning and best practices. So, you know, really got a sense as to how that can be powerful and transformational in leading sector change. And I would also say that early in my career, I had the opportunity to teach undergraduate courses at the UC system and that gave me a real appreciation for just the diversity of experiences that different students are bringing to that first year experience and also you know really the ability to see on the front lines as to where we as a higher ed sector were meeting their needs well and and where we are not. All of those different experiences and a real focus and passion for economic development, workforce development led me to believe that a platform that is collaborative and that is national like the Business-Higher Education Forum is really important because it's an opportunity to focus on and catalyze impact on one of the most important issues of our time–better and closer collaboration between businesses and education, to support economic mobility, economic growth, to build those more inclusive, effective, and affordable pathways that we seek to be built. And I'm really honored to be working with leaders across business and institutions that are doing that. So what that leads me to bring to our work, right, is that focus on collaborative models, proven approaches to support change, and understanding of and how to translate across the business and higher ed sector. One brief experience I had that's helpful oftentimes there is working in the state department as a diplomat, right? One of the things that you will find that, right, can hamper, I think, and we hear this frequently, collaboration between the business sector and the higher ed sector–it's just the translation, right? Even something as simple as skills and learning outcomes, right? It's a different language and a different vernacular. And so we play a really important role there in the translation. So those are some of the things about me that I bring to our work. And then I look forward to telling you more about some of the work that I'm excited about that we're doing at the Business-Higher Education Forum.  Kaitlin: Great. Well, thank you so much for sharing more about your background, Kristen. And really appreciate the description of how you have this 360 degree view on this work. And so much of what you said rings true to me, especially that translation of really just, right, sometimes it's just definition of terms across higher ed and business and how it is that when we use these terms, what do we mean by them? So we're looking forward to diving in with you in this conversation. Recognizing that you've taken on your role at BHEF relatively recently, we're curious to learn more about the strategy you're putting in place as you work at the nexus of business and higher ed at BHEF?  Kristen: I started in February of 2024, so just about at the six month mark. So definitely excited to share with you some of the work we're putting in motion while also continuing to make sure that we evolve agilely our work in ways that are responsive to the needs of the market, et cetera. Yes, so I mean, I left a great role and incredible colleagues at a boutique strategy consulting firm that I was at before because I again, I think that the mission and platform and work that our board of directors and our network and partners and team at the Business-Higher Education Forum are working on are the most important issues of our time. There's, as you know, what we are positioned to do is again, build those bridges and points of collaboration and points of partnership. Deep, sustained partnership between higher education and business. And so a couple of things that we're thinking about are obviously, there are huge transformations happening across our economy. Emerging technologies are accelerating those, and we continue to see significant shortages in key occupations, like cyber, advanced manufacturing, green jobs, and STEM. And those are roles that are really critical to the security and economic growth of our country as well as the economic mobility and opportunities of individuals. In addition, as you all know, the kind of half-life on skills is shortening. And so, one recent estimate from IBM is that 40% of the workforce will need to re-skill due to these disruptions in the next three years. I've seen estimates even more than that. But so, there's a real imperative to make sure that number one we as a sector are aligning talent supply and demand, so that both at an occupational level, as well as from a skills alignment level and acknowledging that that's a lifelong process. And we also believe, and I also believe, that higher education needs to and is a critical talent engine for economic development and can be a talent partner of choice for business. And so one of the things that's core to our work and mission is that we create spaces for higher education and business leaders to co-create and experiment with building those more inclusive, agile, and effective paradigms that enable us to recruit, develop, and connect talent to opportunity across those areas. A few of the things that we're really doubling down on to address those issues and that build on our history and legacy but refashion us for a new era. So for context, you know, and Kaitlin, you shared this at the outset, the Business-Higher Education Forum has operated as a national nonprofit organization that's comprised of really committed leaders from major corporations, as well as presidents and chancellors and their teams of innovative, agile colleges and universities, so inclusive of two-year and four-year institutions across the country. Those leaders have opted in to studying, co-designing, piloting, and building new pathways that close those critical talent gaps and emerging and in-demand skill areas. Some of the strategic areas of focus that we are either recommitting to or pursuing that are a little bit different than in the past, I'll walk you through. But we're committed as ever to our why of building those stronger pathways between education and employment. We are not a think tank or a research house. We do put out research and some insights and we put out toolkits. You can find some of those on our website. There's a lot of great, really well done reports and research assets there. But most importantly, we are working to catalyze and test, refine, and replicate what works in the field. So there's kind of four things that we're really focused on there and doing for our network, and then sharing also more broadly with the field at large. First, we continue to do work that we've done historically, both individually and with our partners, around illuminating and shining a light on those places where we need to close skill gaps. We've done and continue to do a significant amount of work looking at how AI is impacting the workforce, green jobs and skills, and you can find actually several blogs, etc. on that on our website to see more of what we're working on there. The second and a really major piece that we're also focused on is the development of new models. So as I said before, prototyping, implementing and scaling solutions that bridge learning and work. Two places there that I'll mention as examples: we're spending a lot of time right now focused on new work-based learning models. We're going to be coming out and releasing in September a national survey of over 2,500 employers, and focus groups around how to design work-based learning and scale work-based learning in ways that increase supply because it's responsive to employer needs in addition to being a high quality experience for the learner. We know how important internships are. We can talk more about that later in our conversation. But because of that, that's a place that we're really committed to not only sharing research around design and design models that can increase scale, but also supporting and being a part of the sets of solutions that enable institutions and employers to more effectively implement work-based learning models. We also continue to look at and help on the institution side in particular, think about how do you design and how do you implement more effective models for employer engagement. We know that's a real area of challenge in terms of higher ed really asking and how do we more effectively engage with employers and what does that look like? And then last but not least, a key piece of what we continue to do is convening and bringing together an action oriented forums leaders so that we can catalyze, we can sense make and then catalyze change and really sharing that with the field. And I think that's something that's a little bit different than you'll see in the past. We've launched a blog. We're really working to, you know, get out the work and insights that our team has been learning from 45 years of facilitating effective partnership, and making sure those best practices and solutions are out there. The last thing I'll say is there's three ways that we work and that we're committed to. One is around a membership network so institutions and businesses can work with us as part of an annual collaboration where we develop an annual research and impact agenda, have frequent virtual round tables and emerging topics and just really allow for peer to peer executive and team learning. And then secondly, we have a solutions lab where we build on our strong track record of working across our network and partners to do things like implement regional initiatives, cross-sector pilots, and to really work to again implement in the field. And we work with many philanthropic partners there as well in terms of implementing, again, regional initiatives and bringing together business and higher ed leaders to solve for talent gaps. And I can give you more examples as we talk today. The last thing I would just say that I think is important as we move forward, is we're really focused on expanding and growing our network of innovators. Historically, the forum had some convenings that were a little bit more exclusive and our philosophy and board has really taken the approach that to have the impact on the student experience and on the economy that we want to, we need to have a thriving and growing network of innovators. In addition to our incredibly strong board and leadership of Fortune 100, Fortune 500, and large public and private institutions, we also are continuing to expand our partnerships with the community college sector, for example, with regional public colleges, as well as with other corporate leaders. And for example, we've just named some new board members that represent those sectors and allow us to better serve their needs. Those are some of the things that we're really focused on. And I'm really excited about the work that our team continues to do. We've got an incredibly, we have a small but diverse team that includes experience from the Department of Commerce from workforce development boards, from working at institutions, from working in HR and talent roles. And so really have experienced both in building community, advising the stakeholders that we work with and having walked in their shoes. So really excited about the work that we continue to do and the opportunities to foster collaboration and impact across the business and higher education sectors because we know how important it is. Julian: Well, it sounds like you've really hit the ground running, Kristen, in the first six months, so congrats. It's amazing. You sound like you've been there for six years, maybe. But I'd like to dig a little bit deeper in terms of the modeling. One of the things we like to do on Work Force is people want specifics. They want to know what are examples and how to do it. And so we'd love to hear a little bit more. You've talked some, but about what learning models do you feel are working well as you look across business and higher ed partnerships? And then as well, you mentioned, for example, the language issue, which keeps coming up again and again with us. It's like so much of this is about language. And what do you see as challenges? So let's work in challenges, examples, please.  Kristen: So I'm really encouraged at what I see around the role of, you know, in regions, business and higher ed working together to address talent gaps and mobilize, right, by whether it be state or fed record federal investments, and in certain cases, philanthropic investments as well to, you know, seed and scale work. So I think that, you know, place-based focus on solving specific regional economic development challenges is important. And there are a few examples of effective approaches that we've been working a part of that I'd be happy to share. And what I see as being some of the key ingredients around them. So a couple of things that I would say, so we've been doing, for example, our team in the state of Connecticut, working pretty expansively with the office of the governor's office, working with the business sector leadership, so really strong business sector leadership out of you know organizations that include but are not limited to. Accenture, Stanley Black and Decker, also working side by side with the and representing the broader business community. Also working side by side with the higher education community, the independent colleges and leadership in the state as well as the public colleges in the state, in the system, and the individual institutions. That was brought together, again, by strong higher ed leadership and business leadership coming together saying, number one, we as a state have significant workforce shortages and key talent areas that are critical to our economic growth, and we also are one of the most, the states with the highest levels of economic inequality in terms of the income variation and ranges. So we need to mobilize together to do something about that, right? So strong leadership, right, is a key ingredient when it comes to cross sector collaboration. And that's one example from this, that's one takeaway from this Connecticut example that I think transcends. Secondly, I think another important thing that's really important that we see as what's working and what can drive success is then clear signaling mechanisms and the use of data. So in this case and in the case of other effective cross-sector partnerships that we see, it is then the use of data to hone in, so labor market data in terms of what is it, right, that it's being expressed by the employer community. What is it, where do we have gaps, as well as then what those supply side avenues look like. And when I say supply side, I mean the traditional higher education credentials in terms of the associate's degree, the bachelor's degree, as well as the certificates and the industry embedded credentials that might be a part of that pathway as well. So really, looking at that data together, getting us a sense of those supply and demand gaps, those KSAs, et cetera, but then also acknowledging that there are emerging skills and dialogue that needs to happen around those skills that's critical as well. And ensuring that that's being updated, et cetera. And again, that's something that in the case of this example of the tech talent accelerator in Connecticut, all focused then on many tech roles that got pretty specific around what the workforce needs and then enabled the application of different credential pathways across the ecosystem to meet that needs, right? Building on what institutions had what capabilities, et cetera, based on, again, executive leadership, clear signaling mechanisms. And then last but not least, there's a really important role in making that all happen in a way that is highly collaborative, right? Around project management, around sustaining long-term partnerships, and around providing capacity and support for that. So there's an important role of then intermediaries that are convening the different groups that are creating template agreements, and that are supporting the application and implementation of the development of those talent pathways. And some of that might include things that, you know, there's general convening, sense-making, and, you know, project planning. There is the bringing funding, whether it's philanthropic or otherwise to the approach. There's also that translation, right, that skill around the translation. And then there is also sometimes the bringing to the table of how to implement industry credentials, how to implement experiential learning models and how to think about the use of different technologies to do that as well. That sector-based collaborative approach to solve at scale a regional talent challenge, right? And the use of leadership, data signaling and strong intermediaries, whether it be the use of industry associations, regional workforce boards, organizations like ours, and in this case, we work collaboratively with NEBI, which is the regional board, and those being really important kind of takeaways in terms of how to do the multi-institution, multi-industry collaboration, which is where you can really see scaled impact as one example.  Julian: I in particular like that you are looking at sustainability in a very practical way, you know, agreements and project management, because I think so often and with all the money that's out there now, we see, you know, money, something's gonna happen if you pour a lot of money into it and then the money goes away and we revert. And I think that, you know, the approach you're taking seems to give us a greater chance of having some of this, some of this work really stick over the long haul.  Kristen: Yes, I think that is really important, right? There's leadership, focus, right? Metrics, what are the goals we're seeking to achieve? How are we ensuring that we are investing collaboratively, even in recruitment strategies in some cases, especially for emerging areas that where we're learners, whether they're traditional or non-traditional age, may not be aware of them, right? I see sometimes that if we build it, they will come model, right? Which is, as you all know, it doesn't work that way. You need to also think about marketing and recruitment and how are you gonna partner with community-based organizations to ensure that you're accessing different learner and worker populations and really reaching out to sideline talent in some of these cases as well. A huge challenge that we have as a nation is that we need to make sure that we are activating and empowering all talent to be successful for the... because of the skill gaps that we see, because of the occupational demand that we have, and to ensure that everyone can participate in the economic success and mobility that we know higher education can help to achieve.  Kaitlin: So Kristen, you've given us so many practical takeaways and examples in what you've shared today. But as we think about the question, we often ask our guests, what steps can our audience take to become forces in this work? I'm wondering specifically about, as you just mentioned, the goal of activating all talent and how to do that effectively and pulling on some of these threads of the importance of regional initiatives and collaboration across stakeholders and effective communication. Are there a couple of…when you think about all this work you've done, are there one or two practical steps that you'd really say, you know what, in order to kick this work off well, or in order to sustain this work effectively, you've got to do X, Y or Z.  Kristen: First is, I think it is really important for business and higher education leaders to be at the table in a way that is not just transactional, right? So that it is about, and this is hard, but it is about not just thinking about the immediate term, but thinking about longer term systemic talent strategies. Because one of the things that is important is that higher education needs to work more quickly, agilely and nimbly than it traditionally has to be able to be a partner in talent supply chains, right? For if we think about it that way. And to do that though, business really needs to be a committed long-term partner at the table that is co-investing in different ways in building those pathways into jobs that we may not know exactly how they're evolving and what they're going to look like in the future, right? Especially as we think about the impact of automation, for example, and artificial intelligence on different roles and that's playing out in real time before us. One way that that can look like that I think can actually be pretty tactical. So I mean, first it is, you know, making that longer term commitment and thinking about both the near term and the longer term needs and helping one another de-risk, right? Help the institution de-risk the development of a credential that they're working quickly to develop, that there's unknown, you know, and how much demand on the other side is there for that. We think it's this, but that might change over time. So help de-risk that for the student and the institution. You know, ways to support, right, financially, the students and the learners themselves and ways for business to give their time and expertise, right, to that, right, to de-risk it. Those are examples of what I mean when I say de-risk. And then I think on the higher ed side, help business de-risk their ability to access high quality talent by providing those different opportunities to offer input, et cetera. A specific way to do that that I think is really important is the offering of internships. And so I think this is just one other important area that I think is critical is that thinking about how do we create more capacity for work-based learning, experiential learning experiences, whether they be short-form micro internships up through a full-on internship, co-op, even onto apprenticeship, ensuring that there are more occasions and more opportunities for those. There's research out from Strada, The Burning Glass Institute, just the incredible power of internships on getting a better first job for students, ensuring that students are better prepared and equipped for their first jobs and that they're getting jobs that pay higher wages out of the gates. And so, you know, the ability, the investment and collaboration around more work-based learning opportunities is I think a really important place for, again, many to get involved and to think about how we can better design those. And one of the things that we've found from some of our work that will be coming out in September is that one of the primary motivations for employers in recruiting and offering internships is around attracting talent. But that's not the only reason, right? So there's some different typologies and motivations. It's around, we need to recruit and secure talent. We want to expose students to our workforce and our industry. And we want to test out students and see about mutual fit. But a second area of motivation is around, well, we want to provide our staff with some opportunities to supervise, right? That's really helpful too. Another is around, well, actually that also gives us some additional capacity to help with some additional project work that we have, right, through paid internships, et cetera. And then a last set of motivations around giving back. So things like mentoring and helping and giving back to institutions, mentoring students, aligning and strengthening partnerships with a certain university or community college in your area, and things like that. So as we look at what we know is important to employers, it's important to acknowledge that diversity of motivations and think about that. Secondly, as we look at some of the challenges around offering expanding internships, so one of the big ones is around just operational capacity. So it's hard to find and attract candidates. It is hard to, what's the work that's appropriate? How should I shape it? How should I structure that experience for students at different levels or in different contexts? So given that, I think that as a, both at individual institutions, at individual companies, and as we look across the sector, one of the things that I see real need and opportunity for is to think about how can different intermediaries and organizations reduce that friction so that we can create more of those opportunities and we can make sure those opportunities are more equitably distributed than they have been historically. Because the other thing that's really important for us as a sector to make sure that we are addressing to ensure that we've got more students who are graduating and ready to go into the workforce and into emerging areas is that they've got that supply of internships. And we know that right now it's not equitably distributed based on where you go to school, race, income, and other factors like that.  Julian: It's really interesting, Kristen, hearing you sort of talk about going beyond the transactional, because what I'm hearing is really what you're talking about is building relationships between employers and faculty and students and students who may not have had introductions and experiences with employers of a certain kind and so on.  Kristen: Yeah, absolutely. It's, you know, how do you think about that? There's the, we're talking about relationships at multiple different levels, right? This is fundamentally about how do we build the relationship between the learner and the employer? How do we make sure we've got the real strong relationships between the employers and the institution? And how do we manage those in ways that really align the motivations, goals, and needs of those organizations and of those individuals? Because ultimately, as we start out our conversation saying, for us to address the scale of magnitude of talent supply demand challenges that we have as a nation, we need to be working collectively together to share data, to share best practices, and to it's also sure what's not working, right? In ways that allow us to move farther faster to connect talent to opportunity.  Julian: Wow, well, you've given us a lot to think about, Kristen. And as we wind down the conversation, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work?  Kristen: You can Google the Business-Higher Education Forum and check out our website. We've got a blog post that we publish on LinkedIn. We also host for our network a convening for our network members in October. And if you are a business leader or a higher education leader or intermediary serving those audiences, you can reach out to me to learn more about that and about our network and our work. And I'm always happy to talk to other change makers who are leading the work to ensure that we are connecting learners in the higher education ecosystem to opportunity and that we are sharing what's working so that we can have greater impact together.  Kaitlin: Thank you, Kristen, for taking the time to join us today and for sharing what your learning is working in this complex space of the intersection of business and higher ed and industry. And we really appreciate your sharing your lessons learned and vision for going forward and look forward to continue to being in touch.  Kristen: Thank you. It's been great to be with you both. Stay cool.  Julian: Thank you, you too, Kristen.  Kaitlin: That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Workforces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at Workforces.info or on Apple, Amazon, and Spotify. Please subscribe, like, and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.  

Becky Lewis is Director of Education and Workforce Development at NextFlex, a manufacturing institute dedicated to innovation and workforce development in the flexible hybrid electronics sector. Becky shares her passion for creating pathways for untapped talent to access good-paying jobs and discusses the challenges and opportunities in addressing the skills gap in advanced manufacturing. The conversation delves into NextFlex's innovative learning programs, including the nationally scaled FlexFactor program for K-12 students and their initiatives to support incumbent worker training. Becky also highlights NextFlex's commitment to diversity and inclusion, with a special focus on expanding opportunities for women in STEM and manufacturing fields. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid. Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning. Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained. Kaitlin: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  Julian: Today we're joined by Becky Lewis. Becky is Director of Education and Workforce Development at NextFlex. NextFlex is a flexible hybrid electronic manufacturing institute that facilitates innovation, addresses the manufacturing workforce gap, and promotes sustainable manufacturing ecosystems. Becky leads NextFlex learning programs with a focus on inspiring and training an inclusive advanced manufacturing workforce. Becky is a seasoned leader with diverse experience in education, workforce development, and health equity. With decades of experience in grant writing, grant management, and budget oversight, she secured over $10 million in federal grants for institutes of higher education and takes a data-driven approach to measuring program outcomes and their impacts on diverse learner populations. Welcome to Workforces, Becky.  Becky Lewis: Thank you, I'm glad to be here. Kaitlin: Thank you for joining us today, Becky. It's such a privilege to have the chance to connect with you. As we get started today, can you please tell us about your background and how you approach your work?  Becky: Of course. And it's so lovely to be on with you today as well. So I think one of the threads that's important in terms of my story is that I come from a family of folks that have always kind of given back. And I think some of that certainly comes from a certain level of privilege. So like everyone in my family is mostly doctors and healthcare professionals, social workers. And so I think there's definitely that thread of like, you know, whatever you're doing for a living should also be something that actually leaves the world and society, you know, a better place to some extent. And so I think I've always approached, you know, education and my work from that from that lens. I know, obviously, you read my bio, but part of where I started was really with community college and so teaching community college students for over 10 years. I really, really loved that work and I think that inspired me and gave me kind of a perspective and a platform upon which I've built my career. So I think the vision around that was really like how do we help equip people that might not otherwise have access to education, resources, social capital, to really have social and economic mobility and be able to live a quality, good life. Even though my background is really a lot of public health. And so with that lens, it's like, all right, well, we know that there's a really strong correlation between kind of the level of education that somebody has and actually their overall lifespan, their chronic disease rates, all of that. And so in my mind, there was always that idea of like, how can we ensure that people have as much education information, resources to support themselves and their families and not just survive, but thrive. So I think that's something that I've carried with me throughout my career and now really workforce development, I think it's gotten such a common…it's become such a household name, particularly post-COVID with everything. But you know, I really think what's what's interesting about the work is that it's not just about getting people into jobs, right? Like it's really about giving folks the skills and knowledge and kind of ecosystem that allows them to be successful and thrive. And I think and also just, you know, have good physical health, have good mental health, I think particularly coming out of COVID those have been more like visible priorities, both from an employer standpoint and also from an employee standpoint, because you recognize that you can't actually do your job well unless you are well, you know, sound bodies, sound mind. So I think those are some things that are really important to me and that I'll continue to carry with me in the work with Nextflex.  Julian: Becky, what is NextFlex? Tell us about the goals of the organization and your work within it. Becky: Yeah, absolutely. So you gave a little bit of an overview of NextFlex, but just to go into more depth. So NextFlex is one of the nine manufacturing innovation institutes that is funded by the Department of Defense to essentially reshore manufacturing capabilities within the United States. And one of our key tenants or kind of mission spaces is education and workforce development. And so that's where I fit in. We are nationally focused. As an institute, we have a specific technology focus. So for NextFlex, that is flexible hybrid electronics and hybrid electronics broadly. We're also kind of looking at adjacencies with the semiconductor field and advanced packaging. But our workforce mission really is to figure out how do we support the workforce that's needed to strengthen US manufacturing capabilities and particularly for the defense industrial base since the Department of Defense is our primary kind of customer and stakeholder. And one of the ways that we really try to think about doing that and also aligns with my personal passion space, you know, is by looking at kind of untapped, overlooked, underserved talent and how we can kind of create bridges and pathways and opportunities for folks to have access to some of these good paying jobs.  Kaitlin: Great. So building on that, Becky, can you tell us a little bit about the learning portfolio that you offer that reaches K-12 students and adults as well?  Becky: One of the things that I think is interesting is like if you look at kind of the numbers in the United States, so we know that we are still, you know, the labor market, according to the Department of Commerce, still has not returned to pre-pandemic employment levels. Interestingly, you know, women actually are right around pre pandemic employment levels. And part of that is because of the increase of hybrid work. And so because of that, it's allowed women to be in the workplace and work from home and have that flexibility. However, childcare is still a tremendous barrier to accessing work for, you know, many, many populations, you know, including women. And we also know that, nNot only is there a current shortage in terms of not having enough people to fill the jobs that we have posted now, but we're also making billions of dollars of investment with semiconductors, with the Chips and Science Act, with the Biden incentive funding, and building these, you know, fabs all over the country. And we don't have people to fill those jobs either. So we're going to have to figure this out and really from NextFlex's standpoint, and I think many of us in the workforce development space, the solution to that is really, how can we again build those bridges and look into increasing access to populations that have not traditionally had access to some of these jobs? And what are we missing, right? So I think a lot of the things that we've always done for workforce, like we really have to kind of reevaluate and pivot and think more creatively about that, because the world of work has changed, I think, since COVID and people want different things. People don't want to be working 70 hour weeks. They want more flexibility. They want to be able to prioritize their family and mental health. And all of those things are essential. And for better or worse, people are able to be a little more selective about the kind of work they choose. And so how do we create opportunities that align with those priorities? So I just wanted to like provide that landscape first because I think it's relevant to kind of some of the problems that we're trying to solve. NextFlex has really a kind of K to gray talent pipeline approach. So we have started with our K to 12 program which is FlexFactor that was originally created in 2016 I believe and kind of piloted in the Bay Area with you know kind of urban and really diverse high schools in that area and then really expanded. So now FlexFactor is actually, has been scaled nationally. It's all over the country. We have over 20,000 students. I think we hit 21,000 this, in the last few weeks. So that's a lot of students. You know, it's a really impressive program. And I think what we've found is that people that adopt it and implement it, you know, really have like a brand recognition, you know, and they really like it and get excited about it. And there's some really good kind of outcomes in terms of including, you know, diverse students and also military connected youth among others. So it's been a really positive component of the work that we've done. We also do have, we've done a couple local programs in the Bay Area, one with a community college where we built a technician training program and that was kind of an earn and learn model. So I'm sure you know, like the earn and learn model, they have really high retention rates and completion rates. So we've done that. We also are working on building out some options for incumbent worker training now, and also working at mapping kind of some of the specific competencies that are needed. So if you're an incumbent worker and you're employed at like a production facility, what kinds of skills do you need, like, because you might not even know, in order to move into kind of hyper electronics, advanced manufacturing or other areas. And a lot of what we're hearing from at least that, you know, what I understand from workforce priorities under CHIPS is it's not like we want to train a whole bunch of people to make like one widget, right? And like, we want to be able to give people the multidisciplinary skillset and ability to really adapt and evolve and keep pivoting as the technology keeps adjusting. So, you know, it's an opportunity and a challenge. I think it in some ways makes it harder because it's like you can't have a one program that's going to solve everything. But at the same time, how do you kind of take these competencies or skills and then overlay them within existing training programs to help meet that need?  Julian: Becky, can you tell us a little bit more about how FlexFactor works and some of the very specific sort of outcomes. I mean, it's impressive that you've already served over 20,000 or 21,000 students interested to, I'm sure our audience would like to hear a little bit more about the actual program itself.  Becky: FlexFactor is really ideally situated within middle school or early high school, although it's been adapted for as low as fourth graders all the way up through seniors in high school. It essentially is a project-based learning model where students kind of get exposed to the concept and the technology of flexible hybrid electronics. It can be situated within any discipline. So if a student's in an environmental science class, if they're in a healthcare class that concept of the technology can be integrated. And so they can kind of develop a project that's aligned with their areas of interest, which I'm sure as you know, too, from a best practices standpoint, kind of contextualized learning is always the most impactful. And so that was part of the design of the program. It also really mostly lands within a community college system. We have some programs that are adopted by like museums or nonprofits and they run the program, but for the most part are the folks that have adopted the program are community colleges. And the way that it works is that they essentially have a license from NextFlex. They hire a program manager. The program manager delivers the curriculum in the K-12 system, but they then have a direct path to the community college. So they do tours there. They learn about their programs as a next step. So it really kind of provides this opportunity not only for exposure to the technology, but also like, okay, and then what? Like, so I'm gonna do this project, I'm gonna participate in this judged experience and with industry and have fun. And then, I'm gonna look at, okay, these are the opportunities that I could pursue should I choose to go on in this area. Kaitlin: It's really interesting to hear you talk about how you're bridging these experiences, bridging the gaps between experiences really to make those connections for learners and perhaps encourage them to think, like, okay, here's what I'm learning now, but here's where I could be going with this knowledge. It's really interesting to hear how you're doing that through that program.  Becky: I think that is the program's strength because I think, at least when I was teaching at the community college you have one conversation with a student, like that is not sufficient to help move the needle on anything, right? So it's like multiple repeated exposures, multiple conversations, and then showing people like the pathway. And that's really how, cause if you can't, if you don't have anyone in your family that's pursued a career in this area, you can't imagine what that could look like. And so I think this model really allows them to see that. I think we certainly can do even more, we always can, but I think that's part of the strength of the model. Kaitlin: Building off of that and maybe taking the conversation in a slightly different direction, we understand that NextFlex is also building out a fundraising initiative focused on expanding opportunities for women and other untapped talent in STEM and other manufacturing fields. Can you tell us a little bit about that effort as well?  Becky: Absolutely. And this is, again, a passion project of mine. Particularly, I have three daughters, and so thinking about kind of their path through the educational system and then into employment and what that will look like and knowing that some of the barriers, you know, that they'll come up again. So part of the vision of this is that NextFlex will have a perpetual fundraising effort focused on untapped talent. And in year one, we're focusing on women. Part of the rationale for that is when we like, I'm an academic, right? So I kind of a nerd, I did a literature review and we did a bunch of interviews. What we found is that there's a ton of programming, and obviously not enough still, but there's a ton of programming happening at the K to 12 level. So Intel has a program like Million Girls Moonshot. There's a lot of stuff happening there. As you kind of inch further up into college and then even early career, there's Million Women Mentors. There are programs, but there's not enough. And what we see with the data, is that many women who even if you start off like in a bachelor's degree in engineering, even if you complete that bachelor's, their first jobs aren't always in engineering. Often they end up not even being retained within the workforce upon completion of their degree program. Or someone might complete the degree, go into the workplace, and then decide to have a child or take some time off or the workplace culture isn't a good fit and then they don't come back. So NextFlex's kind of sweet spot of focus for this effort is really looking at how can we help ensure that women are retained. So if someone's already in an engineering program, already in a computer science program, we know they're excited, they have the skills, they have the passion, how do we keep them and how do we help and what can we put in place to do that? So is it mentoring programs? Is it leadership opportunities, professional development? Is it, you know, working with industry to think about addressing some of the cultural needs, you know, and policies that are specific to women in the workplace. So all of those things are relevant and that specific kind of demographic is who we were looking to target for this. And in talking to, we did interviews with probably like 20 different women to tea that, you know, across all different stages of industry. And I think the thing that really struck me was, so we're in 2024, like I would think there are certain things that problems we would have solved in terms of workplace culture and other things. And we really haven't. We have so much work to do. And that was sobering for me and kind of, you know, because it's like, wow, we have a lot of work to do. And of course, Nextlex can't do this alone. Like this is, you know, requires all of us at all different levels and industry and academia and nonprofits and, you know, media and everybody addressing it. But I think it made me feel like, oh, if we can even just do a piece to help move the needle and even start some of the conversations that probably need to be had, that's a good start.  Julian: Yeah, that's great. It's definitely important leadership for the field. Becky, before I ask you a question about lessons learned, it occurred to me that I want to ask you a question, which is, what are flexible hybrid electronics manufacturing jobs? So if you don't mind, I'd like to ask you that as a standalone.  Becky: The interesting thing about flexible hybrid electronics is that it is a technology that is used. So any of like the smartwatches that you wear or even things in cell phones, like those devices contain flexible hybrid electronic components. However, it's not widely adopted and scaled yet. So there are places where it's used, actually health care is another space where it's often implemented. And essentially it involves printing electronic components on like in a 3D additive way on a substrate. So and the substrate is flexible so that essentially it can be small, it can be flexible, and it can have lots of different applications. The challenge with this from like a workforce standpoint is that there aren't job descriptions out there today, for the most part, that have these descriptions in them. So what we're, and it really is interdisciplinary, like additive manufacturing, electronics, some robotics in places, like lots of different things that are needed. So part of the challenge and opportunity is to think about like, how do you kind of position a workforce that is equipped to continuously evolve, adapt skills, problem solve, think critically, and have enough savvy to be able to implement and pivot to incorporating this technology once it's kind of at scale, because we're not there yet. So a lot of positions, we're working on writing a proposal right now with some partners and one of the jobs we're looking at is a mechatronics technician. So that's a position that has really diverse skill set, fixing machines, and that could be like really well poised to then implement either semiconductor technology or other adjacent technologies. So that's a good example. But there are probably like five or six, at least if not more, technician level roles where the skills align and are comparable. But you're not going to necessarily see a job description that says, we want someone that understands flexible hybrid electronics.  Kaitlin: That's super helpful, though. Thank you for that. Because like you said, it's evolving. It's new. the connection across these different skill areas. It's exciting to learn about, but it sounds like it's still pretty new.  Julian: And with AI, you know, permeates jobs in the workforce. I mean, I think what you're describing and doing that sort of both anticipatory and helping people with their careers today is just gonna be the way of work. Becky, what are practical steps our audience can take to become forces in extending workforce development initiatives to the K-12 learners and incumbent workers, NextFlexers?  Becky: I do think the manufacturing innovation institutes are not a known entity. I think the folks that work with us know who we are and wanna speak for everyone, but generally like us. I think we are a member-based kind of ecosystem. So we have members, we have industry, academia, nonprofits, like economic development. So we work with everyone. And I think that the partnerships that we create are really important because it helps really kind of de-risk some of the partnerships where in some situations, like certain partners would be reticent to work together because of how complicated and emerging some of the stuff that we're doing is. I think community colleges, in my opinion, and this is 100% biased because I taught in one for a long time. I do think they are the linchpin and the fabric and the bones of this country's workforce systems. I think they are still largely under-invested in and to some extent underutilized. I know they more than any other kind of higher ed institution lost enrollment during the pandemic for a wide variety of reasons. I'm not up to date enough to know if that enrollment has fully returned or not. But I think figuring out ways to partner with community colleges and leverage their existing programming, like one of the things that I think is tricky is you're seeing, at least or I'm hearing a lot of now because industry understandably to some extent is frustrated with not having the workers. And so they're building these own internal training facilities or programs. And I totally respect that and understand the need for that. And I'm like, but man, you have a community college right here that's been doing this and that has, from a pedagogy standpoint and a student success standpoint, like has, really knows how to do this really, really well. And so I still think there's things that we could think about differently in terms of resources and where we're investing resources to get the workforce that we need. I know NextFlex, and this precedes my time, but has really worked consistently with community colleges. And I think that's part of also the rationale for why they were leveraged for the FlexFactor program. I'm sure you both know this, but it's super important for individuals that are from a certain community, particularly if they don't have someone in their college and their family that went to college, or they don't have that even vision for themselves. To be able to go to school within the community with people who look like them, with a familiar kind of sense of connection and community is really, really important. And that's been tested time and time again. And I think that's something that in this country we still struggle with a little bit. I think it's shifting, but I think that idea of like, oh, everyone should go get a four-year degree and that's the thing to do. And certainly that's what I did. And I had a great experience, but I also had no idea that you could go to a two-year school, get a degree, and actually get a job you know, quicker. And I don't think I mean, I think liberal arts education is incredibly important. I'm profoundly grateful for mine. But I also think just, you know, some of these ways that we pass individuals. And I think everyone's talking about this, this is not unique. But we really need to try to figure out like, what is the best for that individual? And then how do we kind of help them get there? And that we don't know, like, like, if I have grown up in a community where, you know, I don't have like, parents with professional connections, that social capital is tremendous in terms of how much you can get a job in x industry or get an internship or anything else. So I think all of those kinds of things and that's one of the reasons, especially for the Women in Sem Initiative, we're really thinking about how can we build mentor programs for women because that's been shown that women in those programs are two times more likely to actually stay in their degree and then persist if they have that relationship.  Julian: We're big believers in the community college system. And I mean, as I've been saying for years, they're the nation's training infrastructure. That's the big infrastructure we're all invested in and I think aren't leveraging enough. And especially in some of these emergent industries where there's sort of this default to like, oh yes, that's for people with lots of degrees.  Becky: Totally, yeah. And I think even though we have done so much work in so many ways, you know, to change that culture, I still think that's a heavy, you know, a heavy cultural norm that still persists.  Kaitlin: Well, and as you raised earlier, too, I think, you know, one thing that's very interesting to me about your learning portfolio are the multiple touch points available for learners are along the way. And I feel like that does allow for some of that. Like you're saying, building of social capital, building of an understanding, especially as an industry is evolving and how the skills a learner is developing fit within that industry over time. I think it sounds like it's interesting to just hear, think about like a learner's trajectory and as it aligns with your portfolio and how you try to reach people where they are.  Becky: And I appreciate that. I mean, of course, I think we can always do better. We can, you know, I mean, and that's part of what we wanted to do with this focus on kind of untapped talent is really like, how do we call out specific groups and then identify best practices or solutions to helping ensure there's a path? Because there's really different strategies that are needed for different populations. And that's the piece that I don't think that we've separated out as much as I would like us to.  Kaitlin: Yeah, that's a challenging area. Yeah. As we wind down our conversation today, Becky, how can our listeners learn more about your work and continue to follow what it is you're doing?  Becky: We are, again, a member-based organization. So we always welcome new members to join. On the workforce side, we also do have members that, we consider members that are workforce partners because we know that not everyone can afford membership. We have a website, NextFlex, and then we do have a couple, you know, we do have a couple of pages. We're actually revising our website now so it'll look even better in a few months, but really building out kind of like for different initiatives that we have, how people can get involved. So I'm trying to have like a specific call to action for each thing that we're doing. So if you want to help us shape strategy, if you want to be an industry partner, if you want to work on this with us, if you want to be a STEM ambassador for the Women in STEM Initiative, so that we have really kind of specific calls to action. So that's something that we're working on building out as part of the new website. And then the other piece I think is that there really is this whole network of institutes that are funded to do this work. So they're all over the country. NextFlex is based in California, but we have presence everywhere, including Massachusetts, where actually I live, New York, Missouri. And so I think like, if there's, you know, depending on where you are, if you haven't thought about like, or known about the presence of an institute, even just looking up and seeing what they're doing, because I think it is a resource to within the community that can, you know, that can help.  Julian: Well, thank you so much, Becky, for taking the time today. We really appreciate it.  Becky: It was my pleasure. Thank you both so much. And it's been great having this conversation. Thank you for the opportunity.  Kaitlin: Thank you for joining us. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Workforces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at Workforces.info or on Apple, Amazon, and Spotify. Please subscribe, like, and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.    

In this episode of Work Forces, Kaitlin LeMoine and Julian Alssid kick off season three with a conversation with Kermit Kaleba, Strategy Director of Employment Aligned Credential Programs at Lumina Foundation. Kermit delves into Lumina's mission to increase credential attainment and reduce racial disparities in education and employment. He discusses the challenges and opportunities surrounding the development of high-quality short-term credential programs and their alignment with labor market demand. Kermit also shares insights into the evolving landscape of workforce development and how Lumina is supporting community colleges and other partners in meeting the needs of the 21st-century workforce. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in.  Welcome back. Julian, isn't it exciting to be kicking off season three of Work Forces?  Julian: It is indeed, Caitlin. I can't believe it's been 21 episodes and I'm definitely looking forward to this season to continue to unpack the cross-cutting themes and opportunities and challenges that are shaping the future of work and learning. Absolutely. We aim to keep our audience ahead of the curve as the landscape continues to rapidly evolve across education, industry, and training really at the levels of both policy and practice. And we truly appreciate the feedback and engagement we're experiencing with our audience and our guests. So, to kick off this season, we're so glad to welcome Kermit Kaleba, Strategy Director of Employment Aligned Credential Programs for Lumina Foundation. Kermit has been a key player in workforce development and policy for many years. For Lumina, he leads a portfolio designed to increase the number of occupational short-term credential and associate degree programs. Kermit previously served as Managing Director for Policy at National Skills Coalition. He also served as Executive Director of the Washington DC Workforce Investment Council. Kermit has a JD and Bachelor's Degree from the College of William and Mary, and we are so glad that he's able to join us on this podcast today. Thank you, Kermit.  Kermit Kaleba: Thank you guys for having me here. I'm very excited. Julian: Yes, Kermit, thank you. And we're thrilled to have you. And I guess to kick us off, we'd love to have you tell us about your background and how you approach your work at Lumina.  Kermit: Let me just, I guess, start by sharing a little bit about Lumina Foundation and the mission of Lumina, and then how I came to be a part of the organization. Lumina Foundation is one of the nation's largest private foundations focused exclusively on post-secondary education and training. We're headquartered in Indianapolis, but we work nationally. And Lumina is known for really for two north stars in our giving strategy. The first is our focus on credential attainment. Back in 2009, Lumina established or set out to establish a national goal of trying to get to 60% of US adults between the ages of 25 and 64 a post-secondary degree or high quality credential, quality post-secondary credential by the year 2025. And that goal has been, we think, very influential in helping to drive policy and practice in the higher education space. We've seen about a 16 percentage point increase in credential attainment since we announced that goal. So we still have progress to make, but I think we are making progress towards that goal. And the other North Star in our giving is our commitment to racial equity. We're an equity first organization. We know that one of the reasons why we haven't met the goal of the 60% goal is because of historical choices, barriers that we've created for learners of color in education and employment and in other spaces. And so in our grant making, in addition to looking to expand credential attainment, we are also looking to reduce racial disparities and make sure that learners of color have meaningful opportunities for education that leads to good jobs and further educational opportunities. A little bit about myself. So I, as you mentioned, I lead a portfolio called the Employment Aligned Credential Program Portfolio. And that portfolio is focusing on, we know that many adult learners are looking for shorter term credentials. Folks are looking to get into the labor market quickly, looking to update their skills. They're often facing family or work circumstances that make it difficult for them to do longer term educational pathways. And so we know a lot of adults are hoping to take short term credentials to be able to move quickly into the labor market or advance in the labor market. And our portfolio is really, how do we make those credentials, how do we identify those credentials that work? How do we help people get into those pathways? How do we make sure that they align with labor market demand? How do we make sure that they connect to further educational pathways? And how do we make sure that those opportunities are equally distributed or fairly and equitably distributed? I came to this work, my first real introduction to the world of short-term credentials. And it is really, it's kind of an interesting ecosphere. I started working on this back, you folks may remember in the last decade we had the federal government was funding what were known as the TAACCCT grants, the Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grants, I think is the acronym. And these were grants, federal grants that were meant to support industry community college partnerships. It was $2 billion over four years and these were really, really popular grants in obviously in the community college space as community colleges were looking to build partnerships with industry and build pathways into targeted sectors. And one of the, one thing we started hearing in 2015 or 2016 from our college partners was we are building, you know, these grants are great, we're building these programs and these pathways, we're working with employers, we think these are going to create good opportunities for workers in our area. But for a lot of the programs we're creating, they aren't eligible for federal Pell grants or financial assistance because they're 10-week programs, they're 12-week programs, they're designed to be quick, they're designed to get you quickly into a new job. And the Pell Grant program only covers programs of 16 weeks or longer. And so even though we're doing what we're supposed to be doing, we're building the kinds of programs that industry is asking for. We can't get people to get into these programs because of the financial barriers. And so I, at the time, you know, I was the, I was doing federal policy at National Skills Coalition and we thought, oh, this seems like a problem we can solve. If these are federally funded projects, we should be able to make it so that federal financial aid is available for these, for the credentials and the programs that we're creating. And, you know, here we are, you know, 10 years later and I'm still working on this issue.  Julian: A century later, or not quite.  Kermit: Well, so that led me to start working on Short-term Pell, or Workforce Pell as it's sometimes called. And so we worked with, when I was at National Skills Coalition, worked with Senator Kane's office around the introduction of what was called the JOBS Act. And one of the things that came out of the, you know, when once the JOBS Act was introduced and the conversation started to grow around the possibility of expanding Pell short-term programs, there were some natural questions that came up about quality, right? So as folks know, there are a lot of non-degree credentials that are out there in the ecosystem. Credential Engine put out an estimate of about a million separate individual credentials. For job seekers, for businesses, for institutions, there's often a lot of questions about how do we know what quality is, how do we define quality, how do we get good information about whether or not these credentials provide you with the skills and the competencies that you need to be successful. And that in turn led us to a project looking at how are states defining quality non-degree credentials in their workforce system, in their higher education system, in their secondary system. And that in turn led me when this opportunity came up at Lumina to make the leap and really start to think about how do we support better, how do we answer that question of what are quality credentials, what are the mechanisms that we need to have in place to identify those credentials and to build those credentials and to make sure that people have the supports that they need to, not just to get the credentials, but to be successful on the job. Kaitlin: We appreciate learning that story and that journey and can certainly see how it's brought you to this point. Can you describe some of the projects within your portfolio at Lumina? I'm sure some of them connect to what you just shared, but we'd love to hear a little bit more.  Kermit: I have sort of three kind of discrete sets of projects that I support. I have one set of invest. One set of projects is what we sort of inside we call our supply side strategy. And that is, one of the things we've learned about non-degree credentials is that we don't have a particularly robust policy infrastructure in this country around non-degree credentials. What I mean by that is we don't have financial aid for a lot of these programs, particularly on the non-credit side of community colleges, even as those are important. We think they're pretty somewhere in the neighborhood of 3.7 million adults who are enrolled in the non-credit side of community colleges every year. But many of them are not eligible for federal or state financial aid. Institutions don't often many states don't don't fund workforce development or non-credit programs through their their institutional, their formula funding for institutions. Many states don't have particularly robust data on workforce or non-credit programs that offer through community colleges. And students often aren't offered the same level of support services that their counterparts on the for credit and the more traditional academic side are. And so one of the theories that we have is that this lack of policy infrastructure is sort of holding us back in a way. If we were to be more intentional about making dedicated investments and tracking those investments that we would see better outcomes in the workforce development space that if we had, if states and other stakeholders had skin in the game about the outcomes for these programs in a meaningful way that we would see, we would see better outcomes. And so in this set of projects, we invest in research to better understand the landscape of non-degree and non-credit programs and the policies that govern them. So for example, we've been funding the Association of Community College Trustees to look at funding formulas for dual enrollment and non-credit and for credit programming at the state level to better understand how are states investing. And we've also done some research around state credential definitions, quality credential definitions under Perkins, et cetera. And we fund some technical assistance with states that are looking at expanding their financial aid programs for non-credit to help them think about student eligibility, programmatic eligibility, and funding levels to make sure that they're being intentional about helping people get access to high quality credentials. The other two sets of work that we invest are fairly similar, but we also have a number of projects that are more on the programmatic side. So one of the things we know about non-degree credentials, workforce credentials, is that you need alignment with industry. And one of the best ways to think about aligning credentials with employer needs is what are often referred to as industry or sector partnerships. So bringing together multiple employers in a local or regional industry with their community college partners, and sometimes other partners, to build pathways into and through those industries. So we are funding a number of projects that are looking at this intersection between industry and community colleges and in many cases working with other stakeholders around diversification of those pipelines. So in addition to making sure that the colleges are delivering credentials that lead to good jobs or trying to lead to good jobs. We're also trying to think about how do we expand opportunities for learners of color in key industries like healthcare and in various manufacturing and IT sectors where we know there are good job opportunities, but those job opportunities have not always been available or readily accessible for particularly for workers of color. And then a third set of investments that we've been making is is in the infrastructure space. We knew when I first started in 2021, there was a lot of discussion about the possibility of a big new infrastructure bill coming from the federal government, Congress and the administration. And we wanted to see if we could help position community colleges in particular as partners in building the workforce that would be needed to help support those infrastructure projects. Do you hear President Biden talk a lot about the millions of jobs that we created through the IIJA and the IRA and the CHIPS Act and how many of those jobs won't require a four-year degree. Well, we wanna make sure that we have the training and workforce infrastructure to address those job opportunities. And so we have a set of investments that we've made in California and Virginia and other places around trying to better position community colleges and technical colleges as training partners in that space.  Julian: So Kermit, given the investments, the portfolio, your experience, Lumina's experience more broadly, does Lumina, like what does Lumina see as credentials that work?  Kermit: That's a great question. I'll speak for myself. And we do have a, as part of our credential attainment goal, when we calculate our credential attainment goal, we do include some non-degree credentials, certificates and certifications as long as they meet a particular wage threshold. So I always get this wrong, but I believe it's 15% above what you could earn with a high school diploma. So that's one way of thinking about defining value is does it offer a wage premium over not having a credential? I think there are other definitions of value that are also important. One of the things that I know we look at is, does it lead to further educational pathways? So a credential that gets you a job is important. We want to make sure that people can get employed. But does it stack to further educational pathways? And is there a good, are there are there reasonable policies and practices in place that allow people to stack? I think one of the things we've been talking about in this space for a long time is the importance of creating stackable credentials to ensure that learners who may not be able to stay in education for two years or four years at a time, giving them the opportunity to get education in bite-sized chunks and then come back at different points in their career and expand their skills. We know that's really important. We also know the data shows that it isn't happening as much as we'd hoped when we first started talking about stackability, Lumina has funded research around stackability. And we found that there are very few folks who, for example, start on the non-credit side, end out going on to the for-credit side. And I think that's something we as a field need to ask some deep questions about and try to better understand why that's not happening. It makes sense on paper, but I think one question is, is it really aligned with what people are experiencing when they're in the labor market and in life? And I would say the other, we're also interested in understanding, coming back to your question of what is a valuable credential? I think we're also interested in sort of understanding the value of the credential from the demand side. So how do we make sure that the credentials that are being, that are being created and offered really do provide the skills and the competencies that are necessary to do the job. So just as it's inefficient and wasteful for someone to spend time from a learner perspective getting a credential if it doesn't align with labor market value or align with labor market demand, the same is true from an employer perspective. You want to try to reduce the gap between what somebody needs to know to do the job on day one and what the credential is offering. And so I think we're also interested in looking at it from that perspective.  Kaitlin: Thanks so much for that response, Kermit. And I think, you know, building on that, I think you're already starting to touch upon it. But, you know, as you're seeing your, these projects unfold under these different buckets or themes, what are some of the challenges and successes that you're seeing in the different projects?  Kermit: One one obvious challenge that we uh... we have been running into is uh... you know as i mentioned Lumina is very committed to uh... reducing eliminating racial disparities and uh... and helping to dismantle the uh... structural racism that has impacted so many people in this country's history and continues to have impacts for for learners and workers of color today uh... anything one of the challenges that we have been facing is that there has been this backlash to diversity, equity and inclusion in many parts of the country. And that has, I think, limited the ability of some of our, certainly our higher education partners to fully participate in some of the projects that we want to support because of concerns about being, running afoul of policies or just the political climate in their states or in their parts of the country. While that has been a challenge, it also then creates an opportunity, particularly for our employer partners as we're making these investments, to, you know, employers will tell you that diversity, diversifying the workforce is not just the right thing to do, but it's the economically imperative thing to do. And so I think we are interested moving forward in thinking about how employers can be contributing to uh, uh, be contributing in this space and, and signaling the importance of diversifying their talent pipelines and making sure that they have, uh, that they are able to engage everyone in their community and, and, and not just, um, not just the folks who have always benefited from these investments. Um, I think that's so, so it is a challenge, but I think also, hopefully there's an opportunity here. Uh, I would say another challenge that we're seeing is candidly, and I think we're probably somewhat guilty of this, is initiative fatigue. Community colleges are really marvelous institutions. They do so much, right? They provide traditional academic instruction, leading to a two-year and in some cases, a four-year degree increasingly. They provide education and training. They provide dual enrollment. They provide community services. And they do so often without the level of resources that other higher education institutions get. They're positioned as the low cost option for both academic and workforce training. And I think we agree that they are amazing institutions, but they are often asked to be, they're being asked to do a lot with very little. And so one of the things we try to do with our grant making is create a space to be able to have conversations or to be able to do work that may not otherwise be able to be prioritized. But of course the challenge I think a lot of the institutions we're working with are facing is the, there's only, you know, there's only 40 hours or 50 hours or 60 hours in the week and you can only do so much. And so I think that's, I think that's one of the things we're just being, we're very conscious of is, you know, making sure that we want to create the opportunity in the space for our partners to be as innovative and strategic as possible. But we also need to recognize that they have day jobs. And so even as they want to kind of move the ball forward and be innovative and forward thinking, there is a day-to-day reality that they have to deal with. And I think that is always a tension in the philanthropic space is making sure that you understand and respect that balance that you're asking of folks even as you try to partner towards a new goal. So I think those are the two kind of biggest challenges that I can think of. I would say, well, and I should say there's also, I think, a lot of expectations being put on these institutions without necessarily a lot of support for some of the things. So, for example, we know community colleges are being brought into a number of federal grants that are coming out from the many agencies. And I think in many cases, there's the money is there, but there isn't necessarily there isn't necessarily an opportunity or a space to talk about how do we how do we do this? How do we do this? Well. How do we learn from each other? And so that's something that I think we're starting to watch for the future is are there opportunities for us to help support institutions, community colleges, and other partners as they're looking to implement these federally funded programs? Can we help them be more effective and can we help create spaces for them to learn about best practices and lessons learned in the implementation of these exciting new funding opportunities? Kaitlin: It does seem to me like a challenge in this work is just, and Julian and I talk about this a lot, but just how fast the world is moving and how fast the landscape is evolving and the complexity of how is it that you go about implementing a new initiative as maybe the expectation is you should already have the results and it's like, but we're just getting started. And then by the time you design your program, things have shifted again. And I mean, it's a really complicated space. I mean, I think it always has been, but it feels like things are moving faster and faster. I don't know if you have that impression as well, but that's something we've seen in our work.  Kermit: I still think of myself as relatively new to philanthropy, even though I've now been in the field for almost 4 years. And that is, I will say that is something that I have been struck by is the, sort of the evolution within, from when we have this initial idea to where we are a year later or two years later. And we generally, at Lumina, we generally do two-year grants. Yeah, it's right. There's the work changes, circumstances change, people change, the political circumstances change. And I think one of the things that we always try to do, Lumina is we wanna maintain our North stars, right? We wanna maintain our focus on credential attainment, We want to maintain our focus on racial equity. Those things remain paramount for us. But at the same time, we also want to be flexible and understand that the best laid plans don't always turn out the way you expect. And you learn new things as you're implementing a project, and you need to be prepared to utilize that new information, those lessons learned and incorporate that into what you're thinking. And so I hope, I like to think that we, in my conversations with the folks that I'm supporting and the groups that I'm supporting, that we do create space to pivot, to change as needed, to adjust to new circumstances. While at the same time, trying to, again, make sure that we're keeping in mind where we were trying to go in the first place. And if it's not possible, you know, then what is possible and what can we take away from, what are the lessons we learn? I think one nice thing about being in philanthropy that I discovered is you always learn something. You know, every project, every initiative teaches you something about the world and about the field and the craft that we've chosen. And I think that the key thing is to make sure that you're evaluate and reflect on what it is that you've learned and how that can inform your thinking moving forward.  Julian: So Kermit, let's put a pin in that for a second. I want to move us to kind of what you're learning and how it's influencing you. Another trend or something that keeps coming up in our conversations, Kaitlin, and my thinking having sort of toiled in the workforce fields now for 35 years is that, when I started this work, this was like the fringiest of fringe work, right? And I mean, I think it probably was somewhat when you got into it as well, Kermit. And now it's also just front and center. So not only is there this like swirl of stuff, but it's like, you know, these under-resourced colleges are now, you know, like in the spotlight, like never before as well.  Kermit: Yeah, having been in this space for 20 years, I would agree with that observation that workforce development has definitely shifted in terms of its importance to policymakers and the public perception. I think there's a couple of reasons for that. I think we know that there are some changed perceptions about the value of higher education, I think some questions about the return on investment and a greater sense from policymakers and from job seekers and from businesses that they want to see a clear and immediate return to higher education. And workforce development is seen in many ways as a kind of a good solution to that problem. And I think part of the reason why you're seeing a growing interest in short term workforce credentials from policymakers is because of that belief that this is about getting people the skills and the competencies they need to be successful in the labor market and doing so as quickly and as efficiently as possible. One of the things we've been tracking is state financial aid for short-term workforce programs. And our most recent estimate, our partners at HCM Strategists estimate that there's about $5.5 billion that have been allocated at the state level for programs that can support tuition assistance for non-degree programs. And that's up from like three and a half billion two years ago. We saw in the, during the pandemic, you saw a lot of states adopting non-degree credentials as a solution. So I agree with you. I think there's a lot of attention. I think though, one of the challenges that we face is because higher education and workforce were seen as such distinct spheres for so long, some of these policy changes are happening kind of in sort of dribs and drabs. So there may be tuition assistance for non-degree credentials, but it doesn't necessarily mean that there are data systems in place that can count those credentials, or support services that can help make sure that those students can be successful, or institutional capacity to help build the programs for which that tuition assistance is made available. And I think that's the, I think, going to be the real test moving forward is can we translate this enthusiasm for workforce development in an abstract sense, right? This concept of getting people skills quickly and efficiently, can we translate that into an ecosystem, an infrastructure that actually does provide the supports that we know are necessary for people to be successful? I also think w have to be honest with ourselves that, I mentioned the estimate that we have a million different credentials out there. We have to acknowledge that some of them just aren't valuable or may not be worth the time you're spending on them. And so the promise of non-degree credentials is that they can do, that they can get people some wage premium in a relatively short period of time. And we know how important that is for a lot of learners because time is the one thing they don't have. Right. So it is, I think this is an important space for us to continue to explore because we want to be able to deliver on that promise. I think we, part of what we need to acknowledge is that we, we don't, we aren't able to deliver that promise with every credential quite yet. So the challenge for the field is how do we do this in a way that lives up to the promise for workers and for businesses, and is a good use of our public resources? And that I think is the kind of the evolution now and the challenge for the field today is, if we give you the resources that you've never had before, can you take those resources and run with them?  Julian: So as we try to move towards a more perfect workforce development union, what are the factors that are influencing your thinking moving forward, Kermit?  Kermit: Well, I'll tell you. So I think there's a lot of money out there now for workforce development. Although, interestingly, money that's coming from places that we probably weren't expecting. So if you think about the, we talk a lot about the three big federal infrastructure laws,  the IIJA, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the CHIPS Act. Much of the money, very little money for workforce development went to the Department of Labor and the Department of Education. A lot of the money that is gonna be used to create jobs and support job training is coming from agencies like the Department of Transportation or the Department of Energy or the Department of Commerce. So demand side agencies rather than the supply side agencies. And...So that's both a challenge and an opportunity for us. It's a challenge because I think for traditional higher education and workforce professionals, if you're used to working with your state labor agency or state higher education agency, you don't necessarily have a relationship with your state energy department or your water resources department and your municipality. And so there's a relationship building component and a really very important time component right, because the money is only going to be available for so long. So I think that it is it is a real challenge that is if you're if you're waiting for these these these new players, these new these new partners to come to you, they may, but they may not. And so it is kind of imperative, I think, for higher education to be more be be ready to start the conversation and make themselves available to be a part of these conversations. But then, of course, it's a real opportunity, right? Because I think we know that the funds that are out there, there are a lot of different job projections. But we know that there are supposed to be millions of jobs that will be created, particularly jobs that don't require a four-year degree. And so the opportunity is there for community colleges and other workforce partners to really step in and be the providers of education and training that help people get those jobs and advance into careers and further opportunities. So that's one thing that I'm thinking about is just the importance of taking advantage of this moment in time where we always complain in the workforce space about not having enough resources to do the work. And now if we're thinking creatively about how to build these partnerships, there's literally billions of dollars out there that can be used for workforce development, which is great to figure out how to do it. And I will say, the other thing that I am keeping an eye on is just making sure that we stay true to the equity goals that have been set. I think one of the things that this administration has done across a lot of these investments is really signal the importance of ensuring that these job creation opportunities aren't just are replicating sort of the same patterns that we've seen in these industries that we really are thinking about how to create new opportunities for women and for workers of color and other underrepresented worker populations. I think we have a tremendous opportunity and space to use this to really think creatively with employers and education and training providers and other community partners to really be thinking about what are the barriers that have kept people out of particular industries or particular occupations? How do we use this moment in time to be true to, I think, what our country's founding mission is, which is to create economic prosperity for all or to allow for economic prosperity for all. So I think that's something that I'm continuing to watch, is how do we structure the work in a way that allows us to really to follow through?  Kaitlin: Yeah, absolutely. And I feel like we could ask so many more questions, Kermit. So based on your lessons learned and, you know, and what you're thinking present day, what are some practical steps our audience can take to become forces in designing scalable employment aligned credentials and related initiatives?  Kermit: You know, I do think there's some tried and true practices around, you know, to the extent that our goal here is to help people find jobs. This seems fairly obvious and banal, but thinking about employer engagements and making sure that you're thinking about, are there jobs? What do those jobs require? When are those jobs gonna come online? I think this is an issue that we often forget, is the sort of hiring the hiring cycles that employers have and when they're bringing people on. I think building strong partnerships between employers and education and training providers and other stakeholders is really crucial. I think the other stakeholders are really important. I think one of the things we've seen is that if you're trying to diversify your talent pipelines, oftentimes the biggest barrier is trust, right? Do you have a, you don't have a strong history between industries and often between institutions and underrepresented communities. So engaging trusted partners in that space who can help broker and build trust is important. I think we're seeing that a lot. I think being prepared to have honest conversations with employers about what's working, I think put a lot of the pressure for the success of training on education and training providers without really thinking about what is it about the jobs that you're offering, whether it's the pay or the benefits or the work climate that makes you an attractive employer and makes somebody want to stay with you. I think we should be thinking about a training program as not just entering a class and exiting a class, but really you know, that first six months or the first year of employment is the if the program isn't working because people don't want to stay at a particular company or don't or aren't happy in the industry. Are you are you as employers doing everything you can to keep folks and are you are there things that you could be doing that would make it easier for you to not only find that the talent you're looking for, but to keep the talent to me. And one of the things we've we've been seeing in some of our earlier grants was um, you know, particularly around racial and gender equity, uh, you know, companies very excited about bringing in all female cohorts or really focusing on populations of color. But when folks showed up, you know, for their first day on the job, they found that the work environment wasn't particularly conducive and wasn't very, wasn't very friendly. And I think that's, that, that is something that you need to start to think about is what is the employer role in education and training beyond just sort of identifying what they're, you know, being a passive recipient of talent, how can you be an active partner in the success of your workforce? And so I think those are just some things that I think I wanna, we are interested in continuing to explore is how do you build tighter and more organic partnerships between employers and education training providers, particularly community colleges.  Julian: And Kermit, while I know you're in a policy role and saw that as speaking to the practitioners truth is number one. It's amazing advice and I would also Just sort of interject and for policymakers make sure all of that can happen.  Kermit: That's right. That's true. And I would say is what you're trying to which is clearly what you're trying to do and I and I think anything I will say this is the I think one of the one of the challenges we see right now is there's a lot of it, you know as you going back to the earlier question, Julian, there is a lot of enthusiasm for workforce right in this moment. I think you have a lot of policymakers who'd like to talk about the importance of workforce development. But it's important not to lose that energy, right? We don't want, we don't want this to be a scenario where two years from now, we sort of say, remember how we were investing in workforce? Wasn't that fun? Like we really, this is a, and I think that that's a, you know, called a, not just a policy makers, but to the field as well as to like, we have a moment in time and we should take advantage of it. And it won't be easy. This was never easy work to do. Resources are part of it, but it's still, there's a lot that goes beyond just the dollars and cents. But I do think we have, I think we are, I think you're right, we are in a unique period in history and in this moment where workforce development has its chance to really shine. And I'm excited to be a part of this field in this moment. I'm really optimistic about the future and hopeful for the future.  Julian: Yeah, great. Well, and on that positive note, Kermit, as much as I would love to continue this conversation for several more hours, how can listeners learn more and continue to follow your work as it unfolds?  Kermit: Certainly visit lumina.org and we'll post publications and information about our grantmaking on a regular basis. So that's, I think, the best way to kind of continue to follow her work. And I would say I'm gonna be out on the road traveling to a number of conferences. And this is a genuine invitation to anybody who may see me at a conference. I'm always excited to spend 20 minutes talking about your work and hearing your ideas. That's part of the, for me, the best part of the job is going out and talking to people about what they're learning and what they're seeing. And so...always excited to talk to folks. Or you can shoot me an email at kkaleba at lumina dot org, and I'm always excited to jump on the phone and hear what you're doing.  Julian: Kermit, we so appreciate you taking the time to talk with us today. It's great conversation. So look forward to following your work and to keep on continuing to talk with you and checking back into the future.  Kermit: Well, thank you so much for having me. And thanks so much. And congratulations on making it to a third year of the podcast.  Kaitlin: Thank you. We really appreciate that and appreciate the support. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces.info or on Apple, Amazon, and Spotify. Please subscribe, like, and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.    

Paul LeBlanc is former President of Southern New Hampshire University. Over 20 years, he led SNHU's explosive growth, expanding access to over 250,000 students, to become the largest nonprofit provider of online higher education in the U.S. Paul shares his perspective on how artificial intelligence and the rise of tools like ChatGPT will bring deep shifts for higher education. He outlines the need to reinvent learning models and curricula, deploy AI judiciously, and coordinate global data sharing. Ultimately, Paul expresses optimism that AI's transformative potential can usher in positive change for society, if anchored by human relationships and wisdom. This forward-looking discussion provides higher education leaders timely insights on navigating AI-driven disruption through coordinated innovation that keeps learner needs at the center. Transcript Julian Alssid: Welcome to Work Forces. I'm Julian Alssid.  Kaitlin LeMoine: And I'm Kaitlin LeMoine, and we speak with the innovators who shape the future of work and learning.  Julian: Together, we unpack the complex elements of workforce and career preparation and offer practical solutions that can be scaled and sustained.  Kaitlin: Work Forces is supported by Lumina Foundation. Lumina is an independent private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. Let's dive in. Julian: Hi y'all. With this episode we are winding down season 2 of Work Forces. We want to thank you, our listeners, for your likes, shares, and engagement with our podcast. Kaitlin: We wouldn't have made it this far without your continued interest and encouragement and we look forward to bringing you a third season in short order. Julian: To wrap season 2 we re-airing our conversation with Paul LeBlanc about AI and the future of higher education.  Kaitlin: This episode has resonated with individuals within and beyond those who contribute to the future of work and learning. We hope you will enjoy this conversation and will be back to kick off season 3 in our next episode. And here we go! Julian: Today, we're thrilled to be joined by Paul LeBlanc, President of Southern New Hampshire University. Paul joined SNHU in 2003 and has transformed the university into the largest nonprofit provider of online higher education in the country, expanding its student base from 2,800 to over 250,000. Paul's been recognized for his innovative leadership and has earned accolades from Fast Company, Forbes Magazine, and Washington Monthly. And in 2018, Paul won the prestigious TIA Institute Hesburgh Award for Leadership Excellence in Higher Education. Paul's work extends beyond SNHU. He served as senior policy advisor to Under Secretary Ted Mitchell at the US Department of Education, and on several national committees focused on education, quality, and innovation. As a first-generation college grad with degrees from Framingham State University, Boston College, and the University of Massachusetts, Paul's career has spanned from directing a technology startup for Hoetten Mifflin to presiding over Marlboro College before joining SNHU. And most recently, Paul announced that he is stepping down from his role at SNHU and is embarking on an exciting new chapter to focus on the integration of AI into higher education. Thanks so much for joining us today, Paul.  Paul LeBlanc: It's really great to be with both of you.  Kaitlin: So wonderful to see you, Paul. Thank you for joining our podcast. So though we've given this bio, can you please tell us a bit about your background in your own words and your journey of bringing SNHU to its current scale?  Paul: Sure. Let me do the first one in broad strokes. So my family immigrated from a very sort of impoverished rural farming area of New Brunswick, Canada when I was just a kid. And I was the youngest of five and the first in my extended family to go to college. My father had an eighth grade education. My mother had a sixth grade education. And they were, you know, my mom worked in a factory until she was in her seventies, and my dad was a day laborer and a construction worker. And like all immigrant stories, you know, they came because it was work and a better life. And indeed there was. So I have a kind of schmaltzy love of the American dream story. And because I watched the way that my two grown daughters have a life now that their grandparents would scarcely imagine if they were still with us. And that was because I had access to high quality, affordable higher education and changed the whole trajectory of my life and thus theirs. I think that dream has increasingly slipped out of reach for too many Americans and new immigrants and working people. So SNHU has been…what I loved about this place when I came in 2003, almost 21 years ago now, was that that in its DNA had always focused on those learners. It wasn't a typical college that started with a campus and 17 year olds and that bucolic setting we see on view books. It started in the second floor over the Palace Fruit Company on Hanover Street in Manchester and wasn't until 1968 that it had a campus. So when I arrived in 2003, it had about 2,500 students and they had sort of continuing education centers and those were evening programs working adults, but it also has a small online program at a time when a lot of not-for-profit higher ed was still looking down its collective nose at online learning, thought it was inferior quality, couldn't be as good, you need to be in a classroom with our faculty to have a great experience, and yet we watched as for-profit higher ed just rushed to fill that vacuum and people forget that at its height the for-profit sector educated about 12% of all American college students. And I thought, A, we could do a better job. We learned a lot from them. And then I think, though, I tell people all the time, when Phoenix University first came along, they really did good work. They thought hard about what does a working adult need in terms of support and service. It really, they only started to go sideways when they became publicly traded, and quarterly reports and shareholder value trumped good behavior, and then we all know how they went off the rails. So we set out to really look hard at what would it take to grow a nonprofit online institution that was laser focused on that 32 year old with three kids and a dead-end job, maybe some credits. How do they improve their life? And that's really been the driving mission of this institution. We've never wavered from it, you know, even though we're very large now, as you said Julian, and while we're financially very robust and healthy, we didn't raise our tuition for 10 years. We're still an affordable option. And we also didn't get distracted by chasing status. Like we've never, sometimes because we do have a campus, we're like, why don't we do Division 1 sports? That would put us on the map. It was like, and how would that make the life of our students better? Like, tell me again how that works for us. Or across higher ed, people will say, we want to get to a place where we can be more selective and get better students. Like, no, I love the students we serve. I don't want better students. I want us to be better for our students. And that's been probably our big driver. So the rest of the story about how we get to the size has lots of good luck and missteps. And we didn't know how to scale when we started scaling. In 2012, I think, Babson University listed us as number 50 on their list of the 50 largest nonprofit providers of online education. And just three years later, we were number four. And in those three years, we were number four. And in those three years, we were hiring 40-50 people and every Monday we were onboarding. We had you know mountains of Dell computers out in the hallways and and more and God we had no idea what we were doing like we just broke everything we had no idea how to scale so we learned some lessons we had our stumbles, but I think you know part of it got us through all of that was this unwavering focus on our mission and doing really good work for our students. So that's really sort of the story of our growth. Julian:  It really is such an amazing story, Paul, the theme of effectively leveraging technology in education has run through this story and contributed so much to the growth, right? As you've said. But reflecting on these last couple of decades, what are the trends and challenges that you've seen as a technology that has evolved and ushered in AI?  Paul: So I think, you know, among the sort of challenges we've faced certainly is the regulatory framework, you know, where we are a heavily regulated industry, and I think regulators have often also shared some skepticism of what was possible in online education. And look at the skeptics weren't wholly wrong 20 years ago. Like Clay Christensen has taught us this lesson about disruptive innovation, is that it usually isn't as good as the incumbent thing it later comes to replace or compete with. It gets better though in a very steep curve. Like it gets better fast. And we get better fast. And we started to harness data and data analytics. And, you know, we have lots of...every month we have kind of open day for visiting institutions. We're very collaborative in terms of people who want to learn what we do. And I would say that the showstopper almost every time is when that visiting team hears how we use data and sees 75 people on our data analytics team and they realize we measure everything. We measure how long does it take to complete a financial aid package? How long does it take to get someone enrolled? How are they performing in their classes? We monitor every section of every course 24-7. We know when students are stumbling, eventually, almost always, there'll be a provost, our president who turns to his or her team and says, how come we can't do this? Why don't I get to ask these questions? So I think one of the things we grapple with is really the poor state of data in higher education at the institutional level, where it sits in silos, there's a lot of data collected, but there's not a lot of data analyzed and put to work, and there are data, generally speaking, in the industry. Like we don't, like when I look at the iPads, I don't recognize us, me, or you, right? It's a weird out of date, like it's not real time. So. So I think that's probably our biggest challenge related to that would be our legacy systems. You know, someone said to me recently, because I have worked my whole career in higher ed, that's sort of like the goldfish who sees the castle and like, oh, there he comes. I just assumed that we were like a big lucrative market and people would want to build great technology solutions for us. That's not the case. We are dwarfed by K-12. We are dwarfed by finance. We are dwarfed by healthcare. The legacy systems that we work with in higher education tend not to be the most cutting edge, the most up to date. So I think some of our progress was leveraging industry leaders like in CRM technology. We deploy Salesforce as a lot of people do now. But when we did it at first, there were a lot of like, what is Salesforce and how do you use it? And by the way, what's the CRM? Those are the things looking back that I think we were able to push through and move pretty quickly on. But I think moving forward, I am in the camp that thinks AI radically changes everything. Like, I think the world is not the same today after November 30th, 2022, with the advent of ChatGPT. And while AI has been around for a long time, it's been embedded in our phones and in our GPS and in our back office operations, the idea that any of us can now augment our intelligence with natural language by just speaking a prompt or typing a prompt in English is revolutionary. So looking ahead, I think massive challenges for higher education, because I think there'll be massive challenges for the workforce. I think the workforce will be utterly changed and transformed. And if university's primary job is to prepare people for a world of work, and while as an idealist, I think it's about a lot of other things as well, but that's its first job. It's why society funds higher education, is to prepare people to serve society. We are a knowledge factor and a knowledge economy and now knowledge has to be fundamentally redefined. By extension, we have to redefine universities. I've argued elsewhere that all curricula became instantly out of date on November 30th, '22. Like if you weren't looking at everything you teach to say, does this major still matter? Like would you advise people to go into accounting? I wouldn't. Someone said I think those jobs are gonna get enormously displaced.  Will there be no accountants? No. But I think it might be 10% of the current number because AI does it so well and faster and smarter. And I think we go through, you know, field after field. And then as McKinsey argues, something like 65% of jobs won't go away, but they'll be radically redefined. Well, you better start redefining your major then, like what are you teaching? And I, you know, I chuckle when I hear faculty in some instances say, you know we need to ban the use of ChatGPT in our classes and I was like, wow, so you would actually ban the very tool that will get students jobs, right? I mean, it's sort of crazy, right? So yeah, I think it's so exciting. So a lot of things have to happen to go to your technology question. A, we have to sort of, we have a lot of work to do. We're very early. Like, we're not gonna figure this out overnight. So we have a lot of work to do to understand AI, how to best use it, what kinds of tools. We need to think about our policies. We need to think about, we think things like academic integrity, the use of writing, what counts for knowledge, and we can go deeper on this one if you like. And then we need to think about how we use data as a sector. And one of the things that I've been working on with George Siemens, who's joined us as a chief scientist on our new venture, is a proposal for a global data consortium. And the idea is that you build better AI applications, you get new and better insights when you have more data. And as a sector, we're terrible at our data, so could we create a global data consortium where large-scale providers would make their data available. It would be pooled, protected in a synthetic layer to protect student privacy and individual data, but that we could all then have better insights. So the Gates Foundation has given us initial funding on the design. ACE, the American Council of Education, has agreed to house it. It shouldn't live with an institution, right? It needs to have a neutral home, so ACE is going to house it. And in the initial conversations we've had with various large-scale providers, if everyone joined who says they want to, the devil's in the details, and that's what we're working on now, we would have more than 30 million students represented globally in that data consortium. So I think it's a very powerful idea. And with that, we can start to counter things like algorithmic bias. We can ask different kinds of questions. We can combat cultural hegemony in the data. Like there's just lots of things that get better when you can do this globally. So yeah, it's an exciting, exciting time. I fret over all the ways we could get it wrong. But I do think there's a version of this that is incredibly optimistic and hopeful. So much of the AI discussion I hear is about real fears and well-founded fears, by the way, but a lot of fear about, you know, the ways in which it will disrupt our society and maybe displace human beings in various ways. And I'm looking around and thinking, is this working really well for us? Like what part of society is working well today? Like, I don't know, maybe human intelligence is overrated. And maybe a little bit of augmentation would be a good thing. I'm not looking forward to like our robot overlords, but there is an argument that says if we train people less around the issue of, and I know this is grossly oversimplified, but if the fundamental notion of the university and the college major is to answer the question, what do I need to know in order to be an X? What if you can know everything? What if it's all a prompt away? So maybe the better question we should be answering is, what do we need to know, or how do we need to think about the world so that we're better human beings, so there are better societies, there are better communities. And George Siemens argues, and I've come to agree with him, that the fundamental shift facing us, and it's a profoundly existential one for universities, is that we will spend less time worrying about epistemological questions of knowledge, because we're no longer the most powerful knowledge entities on the planet, but maybe a lot more time on ontological questions of being. What does it mean to be in this world? What does it mean to be a good human? And honestly, that would be sort of refreshing to my mind. And it might be that we see things like the decline in status for a lot of STEM and maybe a resurgence of the humanities. Looking very different than they do. I think they're kind of super out of date, but isn't that really what the questions of the humanities are about? So I think it's potentially a super exciting time.  Julian: As you're talking, one of the issues we're dealing with in the workforce world is there are a lot of very esteemed researchers, for example, looking at taxonomies related to skills and well, if we have the skills, we have the technology to see them all and read them all, then maybe our jobs are going to shift a little bit and it'll have all sorts of implications for the kind of dissertations we write and the kind of research we do. And as you say, maybe we can focus on making this world a better place. Not that we're not doing that already, but really focus our efforts on how can we improve quality of life and work and ensure that more and more people have productive and happy careers. Paul: If you think about knowledge work, Julian, Stuart Russell is the wonderful computer scientist from Berkeley. He does a wonderful, if your listeners haven't heard it, the BBC has something called the Reflectors and there are four of them that Stuart Russell did in 2023. And he says, he makes a wonderful point, he said, if you had told our ancestors that someday in the future, this thing called a knowledge economy, you go to work into a big sealed box called an office building. And then you'll sit in a small glass box called a cubicle and stare at a really little box that has a bright thing called a computer screen. And they would say, and you'll do that all day, they would say, that sounds like hell. Right, like the work that's wonderful is can I be with people, can I be in nature, can I be making a difference in my community? And honestly, we have enormous need for those human jobs. I've argued this in lots of places like we should fill, we should flood our schools with great teachers and coaches and social workers, right? We should rebuild a mental health care system that is broken. I mean just decimated. We don't have a health care system in America anymore…mental health care system, excuse me. That's gone. We need to fix our whole notions of criminal justice. System after system in what I call in my 2022 book called Broken, what I call symptoms of care, those are all jobs that AI can't and won't do. They may be helped by AI, but these are distinctly human jobs. But if you think about all the jobs I just listed, our society doesn't like to pay very much for them. It doesn't want, it tries to have as few of them as possible, and they don't enjoy the status or support. That's what I think could shift. I think it'll have to shift because those are the jobs that AI won't do well and those jobs left to us. And they're actually jobs that bring people enormous sense of meaning and impact when they're well supported, when you don't burn people out, when you don't mistreat them. Carlota Perez, the economist, talks about this, right, which is, this is one of those moments where you get all of these things, new paradigm-shifting technology comes about, and it's usually around for a while in various forms, but it all comes together in a catalytic moment. So AI has been around for decades. ChatGPT is the catalytic moment, and now we're in the middle of what is kind of like an in-between time. And in the in-between time, all bets are off, like the world gets thrown into upheaval. And honestly, scarily, sometimes bad things happen, like wars happen, revolutions happen, because all the old assumptions go away. Feels like we're in that moment right now. And then, as she argues, in every case, you come out of it into kind of a golden age. Like the world just gets demonstrably better. It doesn't feel that way in the middle of the chaos. Like in the middle of the Industrial Revolution factories are being built and workers are being displaced and the agrarian culture was sort of going to hell. Railroads are coming through, stinking up the place. We're like, that was like, you know, go back to read English poetry of the, you know, early 1800s and it's a kind of a hellish version of things. But then look what happens when you come out of that and you raise the level of society, pull people out of poverty, improve lives. All of this good stuff happens. That's my hope.  Kaitlin: So building upon that point, Paul, that we're in that middle or early stage, early phase of this work. From your perspective, what do college presidents or leaders in higher ed or business more generally need to consider with AI becoming more mainstream? What does it look like to navigate this moment? Like what are some from a leadership perspective, some recommendations you could provide? Paul: So one, I mean, get educated, right? We all need to learn a whole lot, play with the tools. So if you're a college president today who's not using these tools, I think you're remiss. I would encourage all my people as we have at SNHU to be playing with these tools. And then I think as articulated in a book called Power and Prediction, which came up, it's about AI, but it came out before ChatGPT, but it really predicted in many ways. I think organizations have to approach this in two ways. I think they have to look at the organization as they know it today. And then they have to think about the ways they can deploy AI to improve what they do. And I would say most are doing that. Like I see it at SNHU too–all over the place. Everyone's using AI. You know, there are 1.7 billion users of ChatGPT already. I mean, this is crazy. No technology has ever been adapted this fast. And you know, I was in Mexico recently and I was talking to an Uber driver who said his wife is a dentist and he does this on the side and he gets very side hustles and blah, blah, blah. But she does TikTok videos, kind of informational videos to support her business. And he writes the scripts using ChatGPT. And I thought, this is frankly a conversation you never would have dreamed of five years ago. Like literally a dentist doing TikTok informational videos written by and scripted by ChatGPT from her Uber driving husband, like crazy, right? So everyone's using it. So we need to be using it. And we'll see enormous productivity gains as we deploy what are essentially AI point solutions. So marketing will use in a certain way and admissions will use in a certain way and HR will use in a certain way, and they'll use different AI tools depending what they're trying to do and they all will see enormous productivity gains. Let me give you one quick example. Our marketing team of seven people produces these informational videos about attending college and they help our SEO search, positioning, etc, etc. Prior to ChatGPT, those seven people that can produce about 20 short form videos a month. Using ChatGPT today, they produce 150 a month. That's just an enormous leap, right? So we're gonna see all of that. But the authors of Power and Prediction, who happen to be three economists from the University of Toronto's Rotman School, also argue that the real power of AI happens is unleashed when you do a full system redesign. And I would argue that every university needs a sandbox with a small team, it's not a big team, who are given permission to kind of do a blank sheet of paper reinvention of the work. It could be, how do we reimagine this program in a dramatically different way, this major or some aspect of the organization. And that's what we're doing with the creation of Human Systems, which is our new public benefits company. So at SNHU, we're doing the first part, point solutions everywhere, massive impact and productivity, but the small team, the merry band of seven people in Human Systems, has been asked what if you could be unconstrained in your thinking and invent a new model of learning, a new university if you will, that keeps human relationships at the center, so human-centered, but relentlessly uses AI in every way. And that's the work that that team is setting out to do and that's the work I'll be doing after I hand over the keys to SNHU on June 30th. But I think that's, you know, university leaders have to be to really be getting smart, using the tools, encouraging people to use the tools, challenging their leaders to think about how to deploy AI within their respective area. That's the point. Solution strategy. And then creating enough of a sandbox to have some people really experimenting with more radical rethinking of what they do. Otherwise, and this is Clay Christensen's theory, right? And Clay very much influences my thinking, was a dear friend of 40 years and was on my boards. But what he would say is that if you don't want to be disruptive, disrupted, excuse me, with your incumbent work, do a great job on that, but make sure you have some other group on the boundary rethinking what the next iteration of your organization will be. And the problem is that I think most universities are built to be self-preserving entities. So the idea of could we reinvent and disrupt ourselves is a scary idea. It's the one, it's really hard to do. But we've always had this approach at SNHU at least that if we don't figure it out, someone else will figure it out and do it to us. So we might also be agents of our own change and evolution.  Kaitlin: Right. I think therein lies the complexity, right, of where we are now versus what you were saying about the future state of, you know, what are these human focused skills and what does it look like to, you know, pay teachers well or healthcare workers well and what are the in-between steps along the way that get us there? Because societally there's just so much that we'll need to change and evolve in order to get us to that next level. So it feels like we're in that exciting, opportunistic and maybe scary space.  Paul: Completely. And there will be, I'm in the camp of things, we will see, as I said earlier, massive displacement in the workforce. And they tend to put it in four buckets, there will be jobs that got obliterated. In other words, you just wouldn't put human beings on this because AI does it so much better and faster. There will be jobs that are untouched. That's the other end of the spectrum. So think, you know, if you're a dancer, you're probably not losing sleep over AI. Like, you know, AI is not going to do that. But then there's two other categories. It will be jobs that get created that don't exist today or hardly exist. So there are actually about 880,000 data science and AI-related job openings right now. And we'll see that go up because everyone's trying to find AI and data scientists. So those will grow. Now, one of the interesting questions is, will AI get really good at doing those jobs such that we're not filling them with humans? That's a legitimate question. That's not facetious. And then there's a category that's probably the bulk of the workforce, which are maybe jobs that stay today but look so dramatically different that we have a lot of work to rethink. And if I were leading an organization, I'd probably spend a lot of my time on that one. Like I know I have to hire my data scientists, AI people, but I would challenge my HR department to go through and tell me how these jobs are going to change. I suspect, I believe that in the future, big statement here, I'm probably wrong, but being a physician will look so dramatically different and doctors will spend a lot less time on diagnosis prognosis. Like what AI is really good at is prediction. What some would call with Chris Dede at Harvard would call reckoning. It's way better than us already in area after area. What AI is not good at is judgment. The example I use is AI will be much better than your physician at diagnosing your illness and also predicting the course of that illness and also giving you treatment options. And you don't want AI having a conversation with you at the end of that diagnosis saying, God forbid, hey Julian, so you have to go home and have this tough conversation with your family. Let's talk about that. Or how do you want to think about quality of life? Or what are your support systems in assessing what is your resilience? How's your emotional resilience, your psychological resilience? Are you alone in the world? Are you part of a tight-knit family and clan that I know will rally around you? Those are distinctly human questions. They are tied to judgment, right? They're tied to things that AI is not good at. And so if you're the dean of a medical school and you should be thinking 10 years out, I'm kind of like, how does the medical curriculum change? You know, we know today demonstrably that AI is better at diagnosing breast cancer than a radiologist, a malignant tumor. You do not want AI holding your hand and saying, it's okay, we'll get through this together. Like, that ain't making me feel any better, thank you very much. So maybe what this allows is for medical practitioners, health care practitioners, to actually do the thing they're not always great at, which is being human beings. Right? I mean, if you ask, visit like every survey of patients in every major health care system, the number one complaint is, I want my health care provider to know me. That's a human question. No one's saying, I want my doctor to be a better doctor. Usually say, I want my doctor to be a better human. Like stop looking at the laptop and entering data which serves the system and asked me about me.  Julian: You know, Paul, I was even thinking back to your earlier sort of framing comments about the challenges at SNHU dealing with legacy systems. And, you know, there's a part of me that even thinks, I mean, I believe that part of the problem there is similar to the doctors. You know, the engineers aren't exactly trained to be human centric. And maybe we'll have to ditch all those legacy systems or jump them and have engineers that are trained to be much more end user oriented. Paul It may not be engineers who are writing our code for us any longer. 46% of all new code going into GitHub is written by AI. But it may be that software engineering is a much more human exercise of curating code in ways that put human beings at the heart of things. So we'll see. It's actually a very optimistic and hopeful vision of AI. And my family would accuse me of being neurotically optimistic. So I hope I'm right. I hope I'm right. Because I think it's a small window. I think we have to. I think we have it. Like I don't know if you agree with me, I can see the way we got it horribly, horribly wrong with social media and we did enormous damage to our children and our young people, everybody I would argue, our societal institutions. AI will make social media look like a day at the beach. If you've been tracking the election, recent election in Pakistan, the way that AI was used with false avatars, deep fake videos, voice impersonations, crazy stuff.  Katilin: And then what does it look like to educate people to navigate that complexity?  Paul: And you know, I think this is a series of, I've been trying to formulate this framework. I don't have it quite right, but I think we're in store for what I would call an enormous number of sort of flips when like systems that like operated very clearly in a binary get flipped on their head. So if one is that knowledge jobs which enjoy so much status and reward in our country, whether it's in finance or tech or healthcare, all of a sudden aren't worth very much, we won't want to pay very much for them because the system, the AI system can do them much better and human jobs become status focused on what we pay for. Another flip might be, Kaitlin, that if you think about journalism and the production of information, writers and editors are kind of the heart of the work. Well, when writing and editing can be increasingly done through AI at a very high level, the thing that might get actually the value of that may go down. And in a newsroom, the lowest status star right now is the fact checker, the person who says this is accurate. And in a world where we don't trust anything, veracity checking, if I can use that phrase, actually may go way up in importance. Like, what tools, what knowledge do we have to have? How do we know? How do you build systems that reassure people? So when I look at that story, I have some way of knowing that this is actually accurate and not a creation. And look, Europeans are much more proactively trying to get at this through regulation as well. Like, if you use AI in an image creation, you have to label it as AI created, right? And I think we may, the US typically is more of a Wild West show, so we'll see how we do on that front.  Julian: Well Paul, the higher ed world is very fortunate to have you and your, you know, eternal optimism and brain and experience on the task now of figuring out how do we make this work for higher ed. I guess that's, no, no, I'm quite, I feel strong, I stand behind that wind up our conversation now, how can listeners continue to follow what you're doing?  Paul: No, we've been out there talking a lot about this. We'll increase the right about it. Human Systems as an organization will sort of, we don't even have a website. We're trying not to do what so much of EdTech does, which is make huge pronouncements for what you can do. And then actually there isn't anything under the surface yet. Like then you look like, well, what is it? It's coming, you know? It's like, so we're actually trying to build, like we're actively building what we think is a dramatically different kind of learning platform and we'll sort of unveil that later in 24. We have a lot of partners who are lining up to kick the tires on it and give it a try and I think we have some distinctly different ways of thinking about. So in a world of AI tutors like Khanmigo and others, I think this is a distinctly different alternative if we get it right. That's a big F because it's what we're building is pretty ambitious and hard to do but it's exciting. So in some ways it's a little bit of a stay tuned. You know, we'll again, we'll be at ASU+GSV, which is a big for your listeners who may not know, it's a huge kind of ed tech summit that's become a go-to event in April in San Diego. We'll do a little bit of a reveal there and then by late fall though, by mid fall, we will be testing our first commercial products. And there'll be a lot to see. We'll see how close we get.  Kaitlin: That's exciting.  Paul: It is exciting. I think the need is enormous, as you well know. I mean, we have so many people for whom higher ed is either financially out of reach. It just doesn't work for them. And when we widen the aperture of the lens and look globally, I met with the Prime Minister of Rwanda in October and the Minister of Education. And there, because we are trying to do this global data consortium, they're very eager to participate. But when we describe to them how we're thinking about the learning model, what we're trying to build, I was there to persuade them, could we try? Could we pilot this with a couple hundred users in Rwanda? Because again, we're trying to get this…When you think about learning practices, they look different culturally, right? Like even soft skills assessment. So if we're talking about soft skills assessment in a US context, we're trying to train our students to look someone squarely in the eye and give them a firm handshake. In a Rwandan context, that would look disrespectful if the person on the other side of that is your elder. You're sort of actually downcast and almost literally covering your mouth in some instances. So we need to learn and sort of integrate all of this. But my point in the story was that the Prime Minister's question was not, yeah, we can give you 200 students. He's like, how fast can we have this? We have a national need and we need to roll this out. We can't build enough universities fast enough, physical universities. Which is exciting, right? But it speaks to the like, you know, by 2050, a quarter of the world's population will be in Africa. And there's an enormous need for education. So we're excited about the prospect.  Kaitlin: Well, this has been an amazing conversation. We really appreciate your time, your thoughtfulness, and a window into the world ahead, because I think for so many, we recognize that the change is upon us and navigating the uncertainty is challenging, but I think having an optimistic view is important in it. And it's really been really, really interesting to hear, you know, all of the different resources and materials that you've been pulling together that are framing your thinking around it.  Paul: Well, thank you, Kaitlin. I think of Alan Kay's famous line that the best way to predict the future is to invent it, right? Like we can wait, sit, wringing our hands, or we can get busy and try to do the best work we can, shaping it. I know you have two young kids and I am going to have a first grandchild coming in June, which I'm super excited about. I was like, we need a world that's better than the one we're in for them. And AI could make it a lot more complicated and worse, or it could open up dizzying opportunity. But we need to be proactive about shaping the positive and really mitigating against the negative.  Julian: Well, thank you so much, Paul. It's always so wonderful speaking with you. Good luck with the new venture. It's great things in store, and we look forward to tracking you and to continuing the conversation.  Paul: Well, thank you. I look forward to doing just that. It's so nice to see both of you again. Thank you for having me. I'm flattered. Kaitlin: Thank you. That's all we have for you today. Thank you for listening to Work Forces. We hope that you take away nuggets that you can use in your own work. Thank you to our sponsor, Lumina Foundation. We're also grateful to our wonderful producer, Dustin Ramsdell. You can listen to future episodes at workforces.info or on Apple, Amazon, and Spotify. Please subscribe, like, and share the podcast with your colleagues and friends.