Work Forces

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: Thanks 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.

Lisa Schumacher, Director of Education Strategies and Workforce Policy at McDonald's Corporation, shares her professional journey and the innovative workforce development practices embedded in the Archways to Opportunity program. Lisa discusses the importance of non-traditional career pathways and how McDonald's is providing a range of education opportunities, from English language skill development to college degrees, for its employees. The conversation delves into the challenges and successes of implementing workforce development initiatives within a corporate setting and offers practical insights for employers and their education and training partners. Join us to learn how McDonald's is transforming lives and shaping the future of workforce 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: 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 speaking with Lisa Schumacher, Director of Education Strategies and Workforce Policy at McDonald's Corporation. Lisa has more than 25 years of experience in organizational learning and development, and her current focus is on leading workforce development efforts to provide access for education and create non-traditional pathways to careers, both within the McDonald's system and in other industries. She leads the execution of McDonald's education strategy, Archways to Opportunity which provides restaurant employees an opportunity to learn English language skills, receive a high school diploma, complete a college degree, and access education advising services. In Lisa's previous role at the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning, or CAIL, as the Director of Workforce Chicago, she collaborated with Chicago area CEOs and managed a business-led initiative that identified and disseminated best practice learning strategies and policies. Lisa was the director of the Learning Academy at the University of Chicago Hospitals. Lisa sits on the board of the National Association of Workforce Boards, is a member of CAEL's advisory board, and sits on the Alliance for Adult Education's board of advisors. Lisa completed her bachelor's and master's degrees in communications at Purdue University. On a personal note, Lisa, I think we met somewhere fairly early on in this journey. I believe it was when you were at CAEL, and I...I'm so looking forward to this conversation. And in particular, I really see you as one of the very few people who has kind of made your way both on the kind of nonprofit side and now and then out of the corporate world and while advancing kind of the missions and goals of both sides in a way that is, I believe, absolutely needed more and more. So I think it's going to be a great conversation and welcome to Work Forces. 

Lisa Schumacher: Hello, Julian. Thank you for having me. I'm excited to be here and have this conversation.

Kaitlin: Yes, thank you for joining us today, Lisa. We're excited to dive into this conversation. And though we just heard a little bit about your background, we'd love it if you would tell us a bit more about your background and how you approach your work. 

Lisa: Yeah, absolutely, Kaitlin. Again, thanks for having me. So as my bio said, I currently am part of McDonald's global impact function. Just to give you a little bit about my background, I started my career at the University of Chicago Hospitals, which is now the University of Chicago Medicine, I believe it's changed names a few times, and spent actually 20 years there. But the last 10 were part of what we called the Academy. So it was sort of one of the first corporate learning universities that existed and really got my introduction there to, you know, I would say sort of the traditional learning and development, but also taking a step out of that and thinking about career pathways. I'm not sure if we called them career pathways at the time, but we really dug into what does it look like for folks in entry-level roles in healthcare to grow their careers within our organization, within healthcare? Had a very innovative, future-looking chief learning officer at the time. Coincidentally, she came out of higher ed, so she had a different perspective, didn't have sort of that corporate perspective necessarily. And there was a critical skills nurse. There was a nursing shortage at the time. It was the nineties. And so we had to figure out ways to compete in Chicago to get nurses to work at our institution. And our chief learning officer said, well, hey, why don't we grow our own? Didn't really know what that meant. And so we set out on this adventure of looking at our entry-level employees in food service, in housekeeping, in entry-level admin roles to say, you know, what would it look like for those folks to become a nurse? Are there people that are interested in pursuing that career? And then who are the education partners we can bring on to make that happen? And so that's what we did. We brought education partners in-house. We provided pay for folks while they went through the program. And we did just that, we grew our own nurses. And so again, that was really my first introduction to kind of what this looks like. What does upskilling, again, I don't think we called it upskilling at the time, but what does upskilling really look like? And I think I was really very struck by the impact it was having on people's lives. And I think that is the piece that stuck with me. Certainly we were meeting a business need and that was important, but the fact that we were really able to change people's lives, change the trajectory of people's lives by these programs, I think is what stuck with me. And so when the opportunity to go to CAEL, the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning came about, this nonprofit who was really kind and is dedicated to this concept of upskilling and bringing employers and higher ed and policymakers together to think about this concept, I jumped at the chance. And it gave me exposure to sort of the other side of things. It gave me exposure to the policy side, higher ed policy, workforce policy, and this sort of realization that we have these different entities, government, higher ed, corporate America that are ultimately kind of striving towards the same goal, but don't speak the same language. And so don't, didn't, and I still think to a large extent, don't have the ability, right, to come together and have the conversation about, you know, there's a business need. We have people who work in the business. There are people who are underemployed or unemployed. So there's all this opportunity that and just getting your arms around that. And so the beauty of CAEL again was and I think still is as it brings those entities together to have that conversation. And then the opportunity arose at McDonald's pretty, I would say, serendipitously, if you will. And it was attractive to me, one, because it was McDonald's, which seems really cool. And I think two, because I miss sort of that direct connection with frontline employees, which I didn't necessarily have at CAEL. And I missed that from my healthcare days. And so when I came to McDonald's, there was an English as a Second Language program, and there was a desire to do more of that. No one really knew what the more was. And so my sort of ambiguous direction when I started at McDonald's was basically do more of that. We like that, we should do more of that. And so set out on this, you know, mission of first figuring out what more is, and then trying to, you know, sell the business, if you will, on what this can potentially look like for the people that work, the 850,000 people that work in McAllen's restaurant. 

Julian: So speaking of more of that, what is the Archways to Opportunity program? Tell us tell us about those goals of the program and your work within it, please. 

Lisa: So we launched in 2015. So I started at McDonald's in 2013 in the spring. So it took about a year and a half to two years to really create this thing called Archways to Opportunity, to build it, to work through the process. How was this going to happen in a franchised organization with almost a million people working in our restaurants across that franchise organization? But we launched Archways to Opportunity in 2015. It does serve as our overarching education strategy, as I think my bio says. We designed it thinking really obviously specifically about who are the people that work in our restaurants. And we wanted to create something and did create something that meets them at their point of need and also takes them where they want to go. So this realization that we have people in our restaurants who aren't necessarily ready to go to college, right? My previous experience had really been around college tuition assistance, right? What does it look like? What does higher ed look like? What are the barriers to higher ed? But knowing that everyone in our restaurants that was not the stuff they were ready to take and maybe not the stuff they wanted to take. And so we had to start with leveraging that English as a Second Language program that we already had. So the first component of Archaways to opportunity is English Under the Arches. So it's an English as a Second Language program. We actually just launched Spanish Under the Arches because we have managers and restaurants who have predominantly Spanish speaking employees and they want to be able to communicate with them more consistently. And so now we have English and Spanish language learning. The second component of Archways is around high school completion. We know that there is a percentage of folks that work in our restaurants who weren't able to complete high school for the multitude of reasons that people don't finish high school. I think my third week at McDonald's, I had the privilege of meeting folks from Cengage at the time and Ed2Go, and they have a program called Career Online High School. And Career Online High School has been our partner since the beginning of our choice. It's a program designed specifically for working age adults who did not complete their high school diploma, of which I don't know the exact number, but we're around 35 to 40 million working adults in this country who don't have a high school diploma. And so that has been, they have been our partner since the beginning of our choice when we launched in 2015. We just reached a milestone. We have 2,000 folks who have graduated from Career Unlit High School and received their high school diploma. Importantly to us, this program is a high school diploma at the end of the program. It's not a GED program. We wanted to make that distinction for our folks. The third component of Archways is around college completion. We really focus on accessibility and affordability. By far the most, I would say, popular component of Archways is our tuition assistance. So people who work in McDonald's restaurants, both franchised and corporate owned, have access to $2,500 annually in tuition assistance. And importantly, again, that money can be used at any accredited institution. And that was really important to us because when we started sort of shaping what this was going to look like, we had lots of conversations about the importance of community colleges in this country. And when you think about the population of folks that work at McDonald's restaurants and the population of folks that community colleges are designed to serve, there's obviously an overlap there. So we wanted to really make sure that folks could use these funds to attend their local community college That they had some options, they had some choice, but very specifically, they could leverage their local community college. Our eligibility requirements are relatively low. Someone just needs to work in a restaurant for 90 days and work an average of 15 hours a week, so about two shifts, and they have access to $2,500 annually. Again, that can be used at any institution. Then our managers get a little bit more. Our full-time managers have access to $3,000. Knowing that, obviously, cost is a huge barrier for folks returning to school. We also have under the sort of college completion umbrella, partnerships, national partnerships with schools that offer opportunities for our employees. So our longest running partner is Colorado Tech University, CTU, and because of our long standing relationship with CTU, our restaurant employees can get a two or four year degree at no out of pocket costs. So between the McDonald's, Archways, tuition assistance funds, the money that, and the money that CTU puts in, the scholarship grant money that CTU puts in, there's no cost, no out of pocket cost to our restaurant employees, which is just a phenomenal benefit. The final component of Archways is around advising services. And again, this comes from my CAEL days, clearly comes from my CAEL days, the importance of advising. You know, really understanding that many of the people that work in our restaurants don't know what the first step is, right? I've had this thought of going to school, I've had a dream of going to school, I might be the first person in my family to even pursue this idea, I might not have access to an advisor in my high school or never had access to an advisor. And so someone who can help them navigate the kind of complicated waters of higher education. Simple things like, which I have a high school senior, so not so simple, a FAFSA form. What is a FAFSA form? How do I complete a FAFSA form? To more, I think, in-depth conversations around what's the education I wanna pursue? What, do I need a degree? Is a certificate sufficient? How many hours in a week do I need to dedicate to be successful at the college level? Am I ready to enter at the college level? Or is there things I need to do to prepare myself for that? So all of those conversations, obviously critical to the success of folks pursuing higher education. And so we think that's a really critical factor under the Archways umbrella. 

Julian: I'm interested to hear a little bit about the impact on sort of the corporate, on the company side in terms of retention and both for McDonald's own franchises and for the store, and for the franchises.

Lisa: From a goal perspective, so I would say, you know, our big goal that we talk about is overall participation, right? So we've, since 2015, we've increased access to education for almost 83,000 restaurant employees and awarded just under $200 million in tuition assistance dollars. From a company perspective, from a business perspective, in 2020, we did an ROI study with Accenture to really look at what is the impact around promotion and retention. I certainly wasn't surprised by the results because we've all seen those studies and we know that the results are positive, but it was really, I think, exciting to see the results that we got. So we had two, almost two and a half times more likely to be promoted for our choice participants, about 2.3% lower attrition rates, 19% more likely to stay. So we had just some really great results from that ROI study. What Accenture was actually able to do is to drill that down, not direct result, but correlation to sales. And so what they found was that for restaurants that had high participation in archways, there was a 1% bump in sales. And I know that 1% doesn't necessarily sound like a lot, but in McDonald's world, 1% is actually pretty significant. And so it was exciting to see the ability to get that correlation down to actual sales numbers. And so I think the benefit of us being able to tell that business side story, I don't have the dollars off the top of my head of how much it costs to recruit and train a new crew member or a new shift manager. But we all know there's dollars associated with that. And so the ability to say, you know, this person's 19% more likely to stay if they participate in our choices is significant. 

Kaitlin: That's fantastic. It's really interesting to hear what you've experienced as far as the successes on the learning side and the business side. Lisa, as we think about designing this program for scale and within a franchise organization, what are some of the challenges and successes you've experienced over time? 

Lisa: Great question. And certainly doing this in a franchise organization is, it has its challenges, right? Is different than doing it where it's a, you know, fully owned corporate entity. And so I think that the biggest challenge, and it's an ongoing challenge, is communication, our ability to communicate directly with the folks that work in our restaurants to make sure that they are aware of all the benefits that live under the Archways umbrella. So there's layers that we have to go through to get that message into the restaurants. So I think that's a big challenge for us. Data is also a bit of a challenge for us. So because we're a franchise organization, we see aggregate data. We can see aggregate data by franchisee, but we're not seeing individual data. And so that lends itself to challenges. However, the benefits of doing this in a franchise organization, I think outweigh the challenges. I think the benefit of us working through a franchise model is that we have small and mid-sized business owners who run our restaurants, who run their organizations and they are so closely connected to the people that work in our restaurants. And you have, so then you actually have the business owner who's invested in that individual who is say, going through that high school completion program. And so they really become sort of their coach, their cheerleader, right? They're the person who's hosting that graduation in their restaurant to celebrate that individual. And I think that that has had a huge impact on the success of Archways because the business owner is so close to what's actually happening in their restaurants. 

Kaitlin: So Lisa, you mentioned the storytelling aspect of the communication work. Do you have any stories you'd highlight? Success stories or individuals who have had really impactful experiences. We have so many stories that come through. I mean, it's the rewarding work that my team and I get to do and a big part of that is seeing these stories come across our desks, through our computers on a regular basis. A great story that comes to mind because we just had a graduation celebration last week in the Miami area. Jenny Escobar is a general manager of a restaurant in the Miami area. She came to this country from El Salvador, did not speak English, learned English by working in a McDonald's restaurant. When we launched Archway, she heard about the high school completion program. She immediately jumped on us. She was one of our first graduates from the high school completion program. She was then promoted to general manager. She then got her associate's degree from Colorado Tech University. And just last week we celebrated her getting her bachelor's degree from Colorado Tech University. Uh, and the picture, I wish you and your audience could see the picture, but the picture of her and her husband and her four children, so general manager of a restaurant pursuing a college degree. And raising four children, small children, um, just amazing. And so to be able to, you know, see that story, especially because we've seen the longevity of that story, right? It was not a one and done thing. She's still with McDonald's. She's still committed to to her work, to her job, but also pursuing her education is just such a, again, a rewarding experience to see. I mean, we are we're changing people's lives. 

Julian: So then what are some of the current pain points? And then what are the steps you're taking to expand Archways? 

Lisa: Pain point that I just mentioned, you know, the ability to communicate is challenging. And I think even in fully owned corporate entities, right? That's still a challenge, right? So it's not a one-time message. You know, it's interesting. When we first launched Archways, I had a franchisee say to me, well, I did Our Choice. And I said, okay, great, I don't know what that means that you did Archways. I'm assuming it meant, right, he maybe put up a poster in a crew room or maybe he had a conversation with his folks. But that was a big learning for me to help people understand that this message about going to school or pursuing your education or going back to school is not a decision that people take lightly, especially folks who are in entry-level jobs who have, you know, complicated lives and face lots of barriers to moving themselves forward. And so understanding that that communication piece is such a critical component because it's, you know, somebody who's maybe in the back of their mind has thought you know, I took one college class, I'd love to go back. Or I dropped out of high school and because I was pregnant and I had kids and now they're in high school and I wanna demonstrate to them that education is important so I wanna go back. That's not, again, not a decision that people take lightly. There's a lot of fear involved in making that decision. And so the communication piece, you know, is critical because they have to hear those messages on a consistent, regular basis, right? Until I'm like, okay, I can. I think I can do this now, right? It was an idea and then I got excited, a little excited about it and then I got scared about it and then I got excited about it, right? It's something that they have to hear regularly. And I also think what we've done a pretty good job of is storytelling, right? So really making sure that people see people who look like them and have similar lives to them that have been successful, that have gotten their high school diploma, that have then gone on to pursue a college degree, who have gotten promoted to general manager in a restaurant. Right? Seeing those stories and being able to recognize themselves in those stories, I think lends itself to a lot of confidence. That's, you know, that's work, right? Getting those stories, getting that communication into the restaurant on a regular, on a regular and consistent basis. So that, you know, that is certainly a challenge. I think, you know, the second question you asked Julian is, you know, what's, what's next? Part of it. And I get that, certainly get that question a lot internally. And you know, one of my sort of my flip-in answer is, well, we haven't solved the education gap yet. So we're going to keep doing what we're doing. I think it's important to, you know, stay on course with, with what we're currently doing. Right. There, there, we've had a lot of success. There's a lot more to be had and there's a lot more we could be doing. So I think that's part of it. I think the expansion part is thinking about how do we better position ourselves as a pipeline employer, as the country leans into skills-based hiring and thinking more strategically about skills and the value of skills. How do we, as a company, along with our franchisees, who employ about a million people, how do we think, again, more strategically about talking through the skills that people learn by virtue of working in a McDonald's restaurant. And the importance of those skills, those work readiness skills, power skills, soft skills, all the words that we call them. But they are work readiness skills. They're things that you learn in a first job that carry you through, that stay with you, that are critical in any career pathway that you choose. So really being able to demonstrate, importantly, internally, right? Here are the skills you're learning. And here is how they are transferable as you navigate a career path within McDonald's, but here's how they're transferable as you navigate a career path wherever you want to go, whatever industry you want to pursue. So I think that that piece is important for us to focus on internally. And then I think externally, again, because this conversation has really taken center stage is what part does, not just McDonald's, but what-part do entry level employers play in this skills conversation. And I don't have the answer to that yet. I don't know what that looks like, but I think there is, I mean, I think the first step is just transparency around skills learned in those entry level jobs. And that we stop sort of overlooking the importance of those entry level jobs. 

Kaitlin: Absolutely. And actually that's a lead in directly to our next question. And in our discussion today, but, and maybe you can, you can build further on that or go in a different direction. But I feel like, you know, you've shared so many practical steps as we think about how, you know, our audience can become forces in designing scalable workforce development and upscaling initiatives. However, I will ask the question explicitly. I mean, are there other steps you would recommend or specific steps within what you've discussed that you would recommend, you know, as we think about how to take this work broader, deeper that you would recommend to others. 

Lisa: Step one is understanding your workforce, understanding what are the sort of individual pain points, if you will, within your workforce, right? So for us, as opposed to, you know, maybe even Starbucks, for example, we had to really think about where are the people along that education spectrum, where are they, knowing that we had a lot of non-native English speakers, knowing that we had folks who didn't complete high school. And so it was important to us to think about what can we design that really helps them along that pathway? We couldn't just start at college tuition assistance. We really had to take steps back to think about, to get them to that point, if that's something they wanna pursue, there's things that have to happen first. And so I think understanding your workforce is a really critical step. I think then also understanding from a business perspective, right, what need are you filling, right? Is there a burning platform? Is there a burning platform around critical skill shortages, for example, in particular roles? Do you wanna grow talent to meet those critical skill shortages? Is there an opportunity to sort of build people up and then allow them to pursue their careers in other industries and other places? So I think getting your arms around what are the needs of the businesses and how do the goals of what you're creating tie into the needs of the business? I think another really critical piece is finding the right partners. We certainly couldn't do this on our own. Right, we are not an education provider. I mean, we do great things in our learning and development space, but we're not an education provider. So who are the right partners? And I think finding partners who are willing to understand your business, and more importantly, understand your employees and the challenges that your employees face, right? That they're not just giving you sort of an off the shelf, one size fits all program or model or process, but they're really willing to and eager to, and I would go as far as to say passionate about, understanding who are the people that you are trying to serve and what challenges can we help them overcome? I think we got really lucky in that, specifically with Career Online High School and Colorado Tech University that they are, they go to events now and there are times I'm like, well, I don't need to be there, cause they're there. Right, I mean, they speak the same language that we do. So we have really great partners in this work and we certainly couldn't do the work without them. 

Julian Lisa, you're so clear in your vision and your description and it's all very practical. And I guess it's just a little too bad that technology isn't quite at the point where we can just replicate you and plant you in every corporation in America. But I guess short of that, we're gonna have to keep following you. And so I'm wondering, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your important work?

Lisa:  I'm not like a social media expert for certain. But you know, I think the Archways to Opportunity dot com website, there's definitely information on there that gives more detail than I provided. You know, LinkedIn, I try to post as much as possible. I also, you know, I'm happy to, when I got your invitation, I like to share this message. As I started and what my background was, it's really this passion around entry-level workers and they're, you know, helping them navigate their barriers, helping them navigate their careers. So there are a lot of opportunities that I have to speak about this work, which I'm so appreciative of. And so I think a lot of people have an opportunity to see and hear about this work that way also. 

Julian: Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today and for sharing that passion. It just comes right through the pod. I can feel it. And, you know, really appreciate your time. 

Lisa: Absolutely. Thank you so much, Julian. Thank you so much, Kaitlin. 

Kaitlin: Absolutely. 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.

Amy Williams, Executive Director of the National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships (NACEP), joins us to discuss the transformative power of dual enrollment in bridging the gap between secondary and postsecondary education and industry needs. With over two decades of experience across various educational sectors, Amy shares her insights on creating sustainable educational systems that are mutually beneficial for high schools, colleges, and industries. This episode delves into the complexities and innovative strategies of dual enrollment, offering a comprehensive view of how these programs are tailored to meet the diverse needs of students and society. Whether you're an educator, industry professional, or policy maker, join us to explore how dual enrollment serves as a crucial tool for developing a skilled future workforce.

Please follow, rate, and review Work Forces on Apple, Amazon, Spotify, or wherever you are listening. Also, please follow Julian Alssid and Kaitlin LeMoine on LinkedIn. Tune in for more insights from the front lines of workforce education and development.

Transcript

Julian Alssid: Welcome to Workforces. 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.

Kaitlin: On today's episode, we're sitting down with Amy Williams, Executive Director of the National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships, or NACEP. In her role at NACEP, Amy drives the national conversation about dual enrollment program access, impact, and quality. Drawing upon two decades of experience in secondary, post-secondary, and STEM education, she leverages established structures and fosters real partnerships to build sustainable systems that serve the mutual needs of high schools, colleges, and industry stakeholders to benefit students and society as a whole. Her comprehensive knowledge stems from hands-on experience at every level from the classroom to the campus, the research lab to the manufacturing floor, and the system office to the state house. Amy's work to unite disparate systems for mutual benefit has made her a champion for career pathways and a national expert on dual enrollment. Amy's role with NACEP provides her with a bird's eye view of the ever evolving national landscape of dual enrollment, and we are thrilled to have the opportunity to speak with her today. Welcome to the Work Forces podcast, Amy. 

Amy Williams: Thank you, I'm excited to be here. 

Julian: Welcome, Amy, it's great to have you. 

Amy: Thank you. 

Julian: To get us going here, tell us about your background and how you approach your work. 

Amy: As I look back and reflect, some of the key elements that have surfaced throughout my career actually started kinda back when I was in high school. Long story short, I had a ninth grade guidance counselor in my high school. We had our usual freshman year meeting that kinda outlines, you know, the courses you're gonna take and how they're gonna support you. And the counselor looked at me and he said, so what do you think you wanna eventually do with your life? What do you wanna be when you grow up? And I said to him, I'm like, I kind of have enjoyed teaching so I think I might wanna be a teacher. And I swear, he said straight to my face, he said, your handwriting is too terrible and you're not very well organized. So what else do you wanna do? And I said, well, I really love science and I've been enjoying science classes. And so maybe scientists and he's like well your math score is terrible. So what else do you want to do? I don't know if it's a testament to so I took a couple different things away from that one That fired me up as opposed to shutting me down. But that doesn't happen for every student I've spent a lot of time in the classroom and I know that you have to moderate your message to try and look at what you're trying to accomplish for students and messages like that we all know across the board are not helpful in my case fortunately, it kind of kicked off a bit of tenacity where I basically said, okay then watch me. And so that led to some intrinsic motivation to really get my act together and start targeting, you know, academic skills, as well as just getting a better lens on what the world of work looks for. So I think, you know, students across the board, we all know they need support, but really they need more than conversations. And you'll see throughout my work history, they need, students need activities, they need exploration. They also need things like validation that they're capable and in different ways. They need to understand more about the careers and what the world of work looks like and how it can be changing, as well as the things that come along when we hit adulthood, like it's really nice to get paid or fairly compensated so that you can make a living. So like that well-rounded kind of look at, you know, at what we're trying to do is really guided a lot of the work that I've done. But specifically, those two professions I picked out, I eventually achieved both of them. So I started out on the science track. I have an undergraduate degree in geology and I have a master's degree in geologic hazard assessment and mitigation with an emphasis on slope stability. So not necessarily the usual background you get in higher ed leadership positions. As I look back, I knew that teaching kind of emerged as a through line in a lot of my work, even when I was doing STEM work. When I finished graduate school, I went out into the field and did field work as a scientist of my type does. But even when I was in an undergrad position and graduate position, teaching kind of emerged and surfaced and in a couple of different ways. I knew that I wanted to get a fellowship to grad school. So I started an undergrad teaching assistant program at my undergrad university that helped give the skills that would demonstrate that I would be a good candidate for a graduate teaching assistantship. Then in grad school, a lot of the grad students, when they came around, they said, okay, who wants to show the students the mineral samples or the moon samples? Not a lot of people's hands went up. I always felt compelled to volunteer for those things with specific purpose. A, we need to ensure that there are gonna be other geologists that take on the problems of the world behind us. So that's an important pay it forward element. B, as a woman in the STEM fields who benefited from some people who trailblazed, but also didn't have a lot of strong women role models, particularly in my undergrad. I had great allies in a lot of our faculty, just not a lot of women role models. I felt really strongly that all students should see someone who looks like them in this work and see how they could be welcomed into this as a practical reality or a career option. So I think that's really important founding in moving things forward. Now, I said I worked on slope stability assessment from the state of Montana. Montana does not or did not at the time have population density in areas that were dangerous. So when I returned back home, you know, finding a job in the area that I had specialized was a little dicey. I did happen to on, you know, chance find an ad in the newspaper for a science teacher at a small private school. It had all of the, I had all of the requirements and I kind of liked teaching a little bit and had done a bit. So I threw an application in. I got the position. I taught for a year, struggled for a year, but finally, at the end of it, really was hooked. Education was where it was at for me. So I taught in a classroom, high school, middle school classroom, STEM topics for a decade, actually more than a decade. They had a vacancy where the headmaster had to leave on short notice. I had to step into administration and I discovered that actually I really enjoyed that element and kind of building systems that work and are sustainable. So you'll see that as a through line as well. And that drove me over to higher ed to jump into a career pathways program with a special emphasis on dual enrollment, which was something they wanted to grow and expand. So I built a program in a small two year college, took that program and really expanded it in terms of number of students participating, number of high schools that were engaged in it, and really tried to put a lot of thought into what we were trying to do with students. So there's another through line as well. And so through that, my work got noticed at the, you know, kind of in the system office realm, as well as in the governor's office, because our governor at the time really had a priority for leveling the playing field for students and saw that dual enrollment was a really impactful tool for that along with others. So I got tapped to basically do what I'd done at a small two-year program and take that approach across the state and did a lot of work to increase access, particularly in our rural schools. Did a lot of work to build up teachers so that they had the requirements needed to take on teaching these programs in the high school, which works really well if you're in the middle of nowhere, which Montana's got a lot of. So those kind of pieces, building access, working on affordability, and then messaging and how this fits into a student's career plan. So in that position with the state, I was the state director of career and technical education and dual enrollment. We put those together to give students kind of this exposure to what was trending in the state and what was evolving in the workforce in the state so they were more knowledgeable. We built in activities like work-based learning, dual enrollment anytime we could, as well as things like you know certifications when they were of value. So really I overhauled the system and tried to join a lot of different pieces together to make a more useful functional program that benefited all of the different stakeholders that were kind of counting on it to deliver for them. After that kind of work was underway and I had worked on my one goal, which was one of the goals which was affordability, we got a one-two free program established right before I left the state of Montana and that gave students the first two courses free. At that point in time I happened to see an opportunity open up at NACEP, which was an organization I had already volunteered for a lot working on state policy because I had some experience there. I threw my hat in the ring, I got the position and then kind of just springboarded to the national landscape where I'd been dabbling particularly in the policy space for a while. And so that's kind of how I got to my chair now and a lot of what I brought forward into that headspace. 

Kaitlin: Wow. Well, that is, it's a really fascinating trajectory just to hear your path to this current role. And we really appreciate you providing that context for our listeners. So Amy, this is a big topic today. Can you talk a little bit about what is dual enrollment and concurrent enrollment? How do enrollment, how do we define it? 

Amy: So dual and concurrent enrollment, depending on where you are, are terms that either describe very different things or the same things. So terminology is something that plagues our field. But I'll give you the basic breakdown. We're talking about programs. And when I use the word dual enrollment, I use it more as an umbrella term to describe any type of program that college course while they're still in high school, that kind of early access piece. Now there are a lot of different modalities, different ways or structures in which these programs occur. There are structures that are on the college campus where students leave during the school day and come on to the college campus, drop in and fill a seat in a regular section of course of a course. That's one model. Of course, there's online which are courses offered by the college campus. Students can take those in whatever mode that the course is offered from the college. And then there is the most prevalent mode. And that, depending on where you are, NACEP considers and defines that concurrent enrollment. And that is called a high school-based model. In concurrent enrollment and a high school-based model, a high school instructor who meets the minimum adjunct criteria for the college and is working in coordination in the partnership with the college delivers a college course in the high school classroom as part of the regular school day. So those are kind of the three modes either the students taking it online or on campus, in the high school with a high school teacher, or on campus. Now there is an interesting nuance again these things are very complex well not complicated they're very creative in the way they take on some challenges. There are some programs that are based in the high school during the normal high school day that have faculty that come in from the campus and deliver it. You know, those high school based models are the most popular. They're about 86% when we look nationally at the types of programs that students are participating in. 80% are in their home high school and about another 6% are in like a career center or a high school other than theirs. It's also the most complicated model when you try and talk about merging systems and ensuring rigor and integrity and an authentic college experience because you're not just trying to build, you know, in most cases, you're not just trying to build one college course or a couple into a high school. You're basically trying to stand up parts, significant parts of a college within a high school setting. And that includes everything from, you know, how are students being advised? How are we ensuring that they're meeting prereqs or any, you know, gateway scores that need, that are needed for entering a course? So everything from that to how are the teacher and the college faculty working together? Are there observations of the high school faculty with a college faculty? Are there high school teachers that go onto college campus to observe the faculty deliver the same course on the college campus? So there are a variety of different ways to do that, but fundamentally it's not just kind of dropping a course or two in, it is building a true partnership that is mutually beneficial that takes information and navigates it back and forth, all focused on getting the students what they need, when they need, and in the format that works for them. 

Kaitlin: So one thing that stuck out to me, Amy, that you shared with us previously is that NACEP is the first and only national organization focused on supporting programs, practitioners, and policies to advance early access to quality college courses for high school students. With that in mind, can you talk about the role that NACEP plays in weaving together secondary and post-secondary learning experiences and opportunities, just because it seems like oftentimes they're siloed, right? And so what does it look like to weave those worlds together? 

Amy: Yeah. I mean, you know, specifically in the dual enrollment landscape, really, you are talking about merging, you know, secondary and post-secondary. That's a complex process. You have to not just merge them, but you have to meet the requirements of both, which is something that constantly we have to attend to and runs into some pretty sticky areas from time to time. So it's useful to have a resource to tap in for that. And that's an important role that we play in the field. When we were thinking about what we're doing to weave these things together in just the secondary and the post-secondary space, based on the utility that these programs can have to allow students to start to explore as well as engage in college and career before they even leave high school. That's an additional partner that needs to be at the table. And their needs need to be understood, their constraints, and the kind of the conditions they're working under. So when we're talking about the workforce end, we're talking about really truly uniting three different systems that have highly variable elements. And that's complicated work, which is fine with me. I don't mind the complexity. And I really get excited about kind of the gray area spaces, as well as finding ways to mutually benefit. So, one thing that you have to kind of know about weaving together these things on a national level is that it's complicated. I mean, in one word, if that had if I had to describe what it looks like to do this work, I would say complex. And that's fun, because I dig that space. But you know, like, here's why. And this is why it's important. And there are a few important things that you need to understand about these programs. One. there is no national entity that owns these programs if we use the word ownership. We exist to support the field as an organization. We advocate for their needs. We are laser focused on elevating the importance of these programs and building towards the expertise of the people boots on the ground doing this work. And we want to make sure that their expertise covers best practices in building and managing these programs. So we build work to build national alignment around things like best practices. We work to build a community to share about those things and elevate, you know, issues in that area. And really fundamentally we're trying to come in and add a common layer of common understanding, common practice, and kind of as a proxy of aligning these programs, despite no shared on or national ownership in our way. So these programs, another thing you need to know about them is they are highly variable and there's an important reason for that. You know, they vary from state to state, sometimes school district to school district. They vary in terminology, what they're called. They vary in funding, in availability, in the eligibility criteria for students that get to participate. They vary in their structure, the ownership, how many credits students get to take, which types of courses are open to them, when in their high school career these programs are open to them, and kind of the ultimate objectives. And there's probably more that I'm not even thinking about. And there's a good reason for that kind of high variability. When you look at the history of these programs, which have been around, by the way, since like the 1950s, they really developed at the grassroots level. And they did that fundamentally in isolation from one another. In fact, that's more or less, I would say, the origin story of NAISP as an organization. Several practitioners several years ago, like 20, 25 years ago, found each other on the perimeter of other education conferences and started talking shop as practitioners tend to do, right? They started comparing notes. How do you do this? How do you do that? What are you doing for student advising? What does this look like in this type of space? And so as they started to compare notes, they started to outline a framework for what program quality looks like when you join high school and college together. There are two, I think, points for this. There's the quality control element as well as the guidance standpoint. We don't need people to feel like they have to reinvent the wheel. And then of course, we're trying to align nationally around common language and common practice. So these people started holding professional development events that really focused only on this work. So they weren't a peripheral element, but had their own place to discuss and working to kind of recognize this really unique realm of education and advocate for more investment, more access, and more research as well. So, you know, the programs, I would say those are kind of two key elements. There's no national entity that owns this. The programs are highly variable. And so when you think about those things and the way that these programs work and what they're trying to do, all of that can be really variable. And that means that these programs really are highly contextualized to the environment in which they are born and built. And because of that, when we talk about the workforce side, that actually creates a lot of useful opportunities. But because of the variation in the complexity in the space, the students' experiences with these programs will vary. You might have a student coming out of an early college high school program that was on a college campus. So their entire last two years of their high school, they were on a college campus taking courses, they're graduating with an associate's or some sort of certificate. You may have a student that took one or maybe two courses in their high school setting. You may have a student that participated in a P-TECH and had all of the kind of degree pieces plus an internship on top of it. So student experiences vary and it may be anything in between those kind of ends of the spectrum. And the last thing I'll say that's important to know about our field is that by and large state policy is an important factor that kind of can wag the tail of the dog. Early in the history of these programs, like we know K-12 and higher ed both have well-established statute. They have well-established structures for accreditation and oversight at the state, local, and federal levels. But this in-between space we work has to merge those policies and meet both of them. And for a long time, NACEP really filled that space with a lot of our national quality standards and guidance. But we have seen states and worked with states to kind of fill that gap through policy. And when that has happened in states where that's happened, in states where that’s happened, policy is an important factor that drives what programs look like, feel like, and what the student experience looks like boots on the ground. So it's complicated. 

Julian: Wow, yes, it sure is. So given that complexity, what are the sort of cross-cutting elements or themes that NACEP focuses on? 

Amy: We have a conversation about this every day. How do we make resources that are useful for anyone out there doing this work knowing the variability? I think there are some clear through lines. So one of the things that I talk about with these programs is because they look different, function different, have different purposes, and are configured differently, which is aligned generally to their context and the needs of the people that build them, I actually kind of like to use the analogy of a car, right? Like we know that there are cars, and cars have a lot of different variable components, right? There are different types of cars, there are different manufacturers, there are different trim packages and things like that. That said, when you're playing like Pictionary, you're still gonna draw a car, right? Like there are fundamental elements that you will draw. There will probably be wheels, right? There will probably be a place for people in that. So really we try and tease out those fundamental elements. What is unique and what is standardized? And when you look at those standardized elements, a lot of times they are the functional elements. You know you have to enroll students. You know you have to set some guidelines and parameters on what the curriculum looks like, what the assessment looks like in that course, essentially you are taking a college course into the high school classroom and you want to build a structure to make sure that those students actually have an authentic college experience, they have the rigor and academic knowledge that's needed and meet the learning outcomes and goals related to that. So really our space is focusing on those shared common elements which are pretty easy to tease out particularly at the program level. And really that's where our quality standards live and breathe is because they can be those anchor pieces of what you're going to have to do when you build a program and how you're going to need to work with students. We just add that best practices lens on. When it comes to state policy, because state policy is important and highly variable, we kind of look for the same kind of trends. Most often states will develop policy in this space of a different nature. Very frequently around funding or who can participate or what the criteria to participate. Like, do you have to have a certain GPA? Do you have to be at a certain level in your classes? Or I mean, in your school career, things like that. So we do try and build the alignment around the common pieces. And we also try to elevate and recognize unique and creative approaches that are functional while also elevating kind of where in the context of that program that developed and why they're using that model. So hopefully that kind of gives you some of the key pieces.

Julian: What’s the focus of these programs, sort of how do they break out between career tech ed and more general education? 

Amy: So when we look at like the data nationally, we find about 70% of these courses that are offered are more in like the gen ed space, gen ed core kind of courses that math, you know, entry-level math, entry-level writing, humanities, things like that. And then we see about 30% as career oriented and sometimes those lines cross as well in some ways shapes or forms. And when you look at those career-oriented elements and what they look like in a high school setting in terms of course content, it might be like adding medical terminology to a Project Lead the Way activity so that students can continue to progress but also get the opportunity to take that kind of college content that helps layer on and support their exploration of the medical field as well as, you know, validate the fact that they can handle college level coursework. It might be doing things like, you know, a welding, taking the welding course and creating a new advanced welding section that's for college credit and allow students to do the welding fabrication. So every high school has a career pathways program. Not every person in a community knows what's offered in there. But career pathways are an outstanding avenue to insert dual enrollment because they are built on multi-dimensional experiences that enrich students, as well as multiple coursework steps that increase their knowledge along the way. And then the ultimate kind of end point of that is really elevating, okay, well, you've taken all these high school courses, let's move you into the next level and do the college one. And so dual enrollment has a very cool practical purpose in that career pathway space, as well as the gen ed spaces. And I think as we look at students and kind of what their appetites and interests are and how those evolve over time, particularly when we hear interesting things in the media about best met and belief in value of higher ed, it behooves students to look at multiple different options and opportunities that are of interest to them and could ultimately result in a good job with family sustaining wages and potential career growth. And we know when we work with higher ed, the types of programs that offer that are really wide and varied. They can be one year certificates that really do a lot for a student and get them inserted in the workforce and kind of business and industry takes over training their own from there on out. Two-year kind of lives in the same space, but also can live in the cool space of packaging onto a part of a bachelor's degree and moving students forward. And we do actually see those in both the more career-oriented spaces as well as the gen eds. And so I think that's an important component to take in mind. Because community colleges do the bulk of this work, they are really ideally very tuned to the local workforce needs and so should their degree programs. So that creates that further opportunity to take that local workforce need and knowledge and what's evolving in it, bring it into the high school classroom, unpack it very thoughtfully with things like a tour to the manufacturing facility or bringing in guest speakers or adding college credits so students can ultimately start on that first path down the road to what's next for them after high school. 

Julian: Given the many lessons you've learned through this work over the years, what are practical steps that our audience can take to become forces in advancing college and career prospects for high school students? 

Amy: I think my best advice is it falls into two categories. Learn as much as you can and start locally. I think those are really interwoven. I think it's really important whether you're coming from the business and industry side or an institution of higher ed or high school, identify what you want to do and why you are doing it. And there is an important reason for that because of the complexity. Sometimes I will call these programs like a Swiss army knife. Like you can do a lot of different things and they look very different in different states, but it's fundamentally still identifiable. It's a Swiss army knife. It's just a difference of whether it has the scissors and the nail file or just the knife. So, I say that from the standpoint of figure out what you want to do and why, because you can probably work through and build what you need if you're kind of bringing to the table the right resources, bringing to the table the right people, and you're really thoughtful about how you approach this. So I would say build your expertise on what these programs are. We have a lot of resources for you that are helpful for that. You can find them on our resource center. And think through what you would want to do with this, as well as what you can contribute and a timeline. So, you know, then I would look around and find out who else wants to do things like this. I think I, in one of our earlier conversations, I shared a very pragmatic approach that I took to this. I didn't have a line item funding when I was put at the state for this, so I had to get creative. I looked at whoever else in my field was working on something or trying to meet the same objective, which fundamentally was getting high school students more informed about their post-secondary, they're after high school options, right? Found a couple nonprofits that were super invested in getting students interested in college. Worked with them to build like an event and a convening. And now they have taken over some of those things and they run a teacher externship program in the summer, which is something that the state no longer has funds to do. So I think finding other people to help you navigate the space is really important, but that's based on really understanding what these programs are and how you think you might be able to use it. Um, I would say related to that and really important to my first kind of experience with these programs and building them is understanding what the requirements and constraints that each stakeholder is working with. Uh, one of the things that I learned the most in my first year was when high schools roll schedules and when they can add new courses to what they offer in the high school because those timing pieces are critical for when you approach and say, hey, we think you need a health sciences course that might augment your career pathway. Would you like to talk about that and we can walk you through it. If I come to them at a time when they've already set their schedules, contracted for their teachers and listed out who's going to what class in the fall, It's not that helpful time for the conversation. Also in working with some of the business and industry partners, increasing your knowledge and focusing on what you can contribute, but also the constraints of others, is really important for avoiding those foot and mouth moments, right? Where you say something and you're like, well, we could never do that. And then someone says, actually I saw this and they did do that. So I would say, build those connections in a little bit of empathy and start looking for the common wins because that's in my experience where people wanna play is in a mutually beneficial thing. Some things to keep in mind are that, you know, every high school in the United States has a Career Pathways program. It's funded by the federal government. Nearly every student is in some sort of high school setting. So that creates a really cool opportunity where you know where the students will be, when they will be there, and really the details of how you work with them are there to be worked out. That all relies on understanding each other's needs. Deadlines. Things like that. There are some times colleges can't move dates. That's just the way it is. There are times high schools can't work with changes. That's the way it is. There are times business and industry and places in business and industry students cannot be on the floor or can only be there under certain circumstances. So identifying what those barriers are can kind of keep you from running into them after the work has progressed really far. And also being a good partner is incorporating kind of those pieces of what everyone's trying to deal with and get to.

Kaitlin: Well, Amy, we appreciate both the high level perspective of this work and the deep dive into really practically speaking what it looks like to do this work on the ground and some of the primary considerations that practitioners should consider, kind of regardless of their vantage point in this space. As we wind down our conversation today, how can our listeners learn more and continue to follow your work?

Amy: I am not a huge proponent of social media, but I am on LinkedIn. So if you ever want to see what I'm thinking or my opinion or NACEP's opinion, you can find me on LinkedIn. It is where I do tend to, to drop my more challenging thoughts or things to challenge the field outside of our events, of course, and resources. So, and I've already mentioned that NACEP's website is kind of a treasure trove of all things, dual enrollment, dual credit, concurrent enrollment, early college running start, jumpstart, whatever these programs are called in your space and whatever term makes sense. So I think those are two really good places to start. And then I would always say that you can always reach out to us for assistance. We understand this work is complex. And I'm not trying to freak people out and say, it's so complicated, don't go there. What I'm trying to say is that there are options. There is lots of gray space to work in. You might want to, you know, bring a friend with you to navigate those space, or bring a map or a guidebook, and we offer those elements too. But we're always there to be that helpful resource along the way. 

Kaitlin: Great, well thank you so much, Amy, for your time today. We really appreciate it. Can't wait to get this episode out to our listeners. 

Amy: Thank you. I hope it's helpful and useful for everyone. 

Julian: Definitely helpful and useful. Thank you so much, Amy. 

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.

David Hernandez is Vice President of Education at IPC, a global industry association for electronics manufacturing. David shares his journey from a family of educators to leading workforce training and certification programs at IPC. The discussion delves into the challenges and opportunities in the electronics manufacturing industry, the importance of skill-based training, and the need for a paradigm shift in education to meet the evolving demands of modern manufacturing. David highlights the role of IPC in addressing workforce gaps and fostering a skilled workforce for the future. Tune in to learn about the intersection of education, technology, and industry, and strategies to attract and prepare new talent to build a stronger, adaptable workforce.

Please follow, rate, and review Work Forces on Amazon, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you are listening. Also, please follow Kaitlin and Julian on LinkedIn.

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 David Hernandez. David is the Vice President of Education for IPC, a global industry association with 3,200 member companies that span all segments of electronics manufacturing, including designers, printed circuit board manufacturers, contract and assembly companies, suppliers, and original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs as we call them, in aerospace, defense, medical, automotive, and other industrial sectors that are reliant on electronics. Dave directly oversees the development and operations of IPC's workforce training, professional development, and certification programs. He also sits on the board of directors for the IPC Education Foundation, whose mission is to help develop a pipeline of new talent entering the electronics industry. David has a strong background in education and training with expertise in developing educational products and programs prior to joining IPC. He was the Director of Education, Development, and Systems at the American Welding Society, Director of Training and Development at an Accounting and Advisory Services firm, and President of E-Baud Consulting Synergy Group, where he analyzed educational needs and developed curriculum. David began his career as an instructor at Belen Jesuit Preparatory School, teaching English literature, public speaking, and coaching speech and debate and football teams. Welcome to Work Forces.

 David Hernandez: Thanks for having me everyone. And that was a very nice introduction. I like how we ended on football though. 

Kaitlin: Absolutely. Well, thanks so much for joining us this morning, Dave. So as we dive in this morning, can you tell us a bit about your background and how you approach your work at IPC? 

David: So I started in education as a classroom teacher, right? And I come from a family of educators. My father was an educator, my mother was an educator, my aunt's an educator, my grandmother was an educator, I'm married to an educator. So education was always really kind of fundamental to what we did. And I think from a very early age, coming from parents who immigrated to this country, I was the first person in my entire extended family that was born in the United States. I realized the importance that education provided in helping people advance their lives, move out of poverty achieve the things that they dream of achieving. And so it was not, I think, a stretch for me to kind of dedicate my career to education from a very early start. You know, I started off in the classroom and as I progressed through, I realized that there was an area of education that by and by was largely ignored, you know, in the general consciousness and general conversation around education that really had to do with workforce around manufacturing. And so I...kind of early in my career, I fell in love with that idea. I started working with many associations, eventually taking a role with the American Welding Society full-time, where we addressed, you know, one of my big focal points was addressing the shortage of welders in the United States. You know, at the time that I joined, there was something like a negative growth of welders in this country of 25,000 per year. And so the goal was really how do you start training more welders, bring them into the industry, get them up to speed faster. And how do you bring attention to this conversation? How do you get government involvement? How do you get industry involvement? Things like that. Eventually, John Mitchell called me up one day and said, hey, we need you to do the same thing for electronics. I said, sure, sounds fun. So I came on to IPC about seven years ago or so. Since then, we've been able to really kind of grow what we do in the industry. IPC today is the largest education certification provider in the world for electronics. We certify 130,000 people a year with our credentials. We train twice as many almost. My role really has evolved into trying to figure out how we can address the specific needs of the industry. So my background in education really has hyper-focused me on the idea that in order to address serious and widespread education challenges, we have to find ways to lower education barriers, right? And so how do you make education available to anyone that needs it anywhere in the world at any time? You know, and so we develop a variety of different methodologies, technologies to facilitate that at IPC. We leverage, you know, online training that is asynchronous so that people who need the training at any point anywhere can do it from their phones, from their computers, from their tablets. We have an online, essentially a university with professors that teach advanced courses over multiple weeks to engineers. We leverage, you know, our network of training centers globally to deliver in-person training. And so it's really not about one solution for me or for IPC. It's really about finding the right mix of solutions that help address the problem. And I think that's, again, driven very much by my background. I have experienced education at so many levels and so many modalities to so many different groups of people that I think I just realized very early on that no one solution can solve a workforce problem. 

Kaitlin: Absolutely, Dave. And to circle back on one aspect of your background, I mean, your whole background is fascinating, but one thing that stuck out to me as you were providing this introduction was really around your work with the American Welding Society. And I'm just curious to hear you talk a little bit. It sounds like a similar theme from that role to this role is around expanding opportunity and attracting more people to a profession. What did it look like for you to go into a role where you really kind of had a, there was a big gap between the number of people who were needed in roles versus the number of people who have the skills? What did it look like to address that challenge?

David: Daunting any time you look at that. I like to think that I enjoy a challenge, right? And I'm really lucky to be surrounded by a group of people who do the same thing, right? Many of the team members that I have with me today at IPC came with me from the American Welding Society. You know, these are, these is a very talented group of educators, of technologists, of futurists who really kind of take a look at these daunting challenges and say, we're gonna tackle this even if it's one step at a time. With AWS, we had a unique set of challenges that we don't necessarily always have at IPC, which was that to train welders, you really do rely a lot on the kinesthetic aspect of training, right? There's a heavy reliance upon that. But, and this I imagine is gonna be a theme today because it's very much true in IPC as well. Whereas welders in the 40s, it was almost entirely kinesthetic in what you did. It was really just about learning how to move the welding stick, how to move the gun, how to do it at the right speed, at the right angle. As technology advances, your knowledge of the theory of what you're doing, your knowledge of understanding of how X affects Y in the outcome, right, becomes increasingly important. These are machines, welding machines today are hybrid machines, they're not fully automated, although we do have automated welding machines, but they're semi-automated. There's a lot of technology in that machine. It's not just a battery pack with a stick. And so you really have to train welders both in how to do that job, right? How to actually perform the welds, but also to understand what they're doing, why they're doing it, and how the different things like moisture in the air can affect that. How the temperature of what you're doing dealing with the metal type that you're doing, the metallurgy of that is gonna affect the outcome. And so it really was about saying, okay, now we gotta take what is already a complex skill to teach and also teach the theoretical mental part of that to these welders. And so that posed a challenge. And again, very much like what I said about IPC, it's a multi-front solution, right? You're implementing online training to help teach theory effectively and efficiently in a limited amount of time. And you're supplementing that with new technology to help train people efficiently and effectively in the classroom. I don't know that I can claim to have responsibility for anything that has been the outcome of that. I think it's more just, I had a really great group of people that I worked with that both in the industry and at AWS that were incredible at finding solutions. 

Julian: It's such a fascinating discussion and also circling back, you know, it struck me early on when you talked about, you know, you kind of developed this particular interest in manufacturing and then this idea of lowering education barriers. I'm in, I live now in Rhode Island, which was, you know, kind of center of the Industrial Revolution, have done a lot of work around the country in the Midwest, in the South, the Rust Belt with manufacturing and boy, that's a pretty big, big lift, especially given that there were thriving industries all over the place that went away and that were staffed by people who are retiring now. And so I'm curious to hear your particular, talk a little bit about kind of the whole industrial shifts and even get, how do you even get people interested? Forget lowering barriers, how do you even get them interested in education when people go and say, oh, don't go there, it's a dirty job or grandpa lost his job at the plant, don't do it.

David: It's a great question and I have kind of a funny answer to it, right? Which is I actually don't think it's hard to do, you know, everyone always makes it a big deal as though it's hard to get people interested in manufacturing. I'll give you an example, right? I fell in love with manufacturing through a very weird kind of series of events. Right? I had, I have three kids. Um, and one, and one of my kids was younger. Uh, we needed to buy them a bed. So we went to the store and we bought them a bed. I put it together and within a year, the bed fell apart. And I was like, this is nonsense, right? This is, I can't be buying a bed every year. This is absolute nonsense. I can build a better bed than this. I have no background in woodworking, zero, right? I, from the time that I was born, I was told I was going to college, right? And I was gonna be a professional. Manufacturing was never even a consideration, right? Now, when my grandparents came to this country, they fled the Cuban Revolution, right? And so they came with nothing. And my grandfather, who was a restaurateur, ended up putting up fences his whole life, you know, the rest of his life. And that because that's all he could do when he came here. And that's what provided us the opportunity. And so when my parents, you know, when I was being raised, my parents were like, you're going to college, you're not going to do that type of work. Right. So one day I said, I'm going to build a bed for my son. And, and so I built a bed and I was like, this is really fun and interesting. And so I started to get more and more into woodworking. And I remember having a conversation with my wife one day where I said, you know, I never considered this a career option. It wasn't even like one of those things where I said, no, I'm gonna go to college, or I'm gonna go into education, or I'm gonna go into something else. It was never part of the conversation, right? And I don't know that I ever would do that as a job, right? I enjoy doing it. And sometimes I think you shouldn't do the things you enjoy as a job right, because then you have to do them, you know, 12 hours a day. Um, but I would have liked to have had that as part of the conversation. So I spend a lot of time going and talking to classrooms and I have for the last couple of decades, you know, and, and especially young kids, and it is not a difficult conversation to have. Right. When, when you go and you talk to a kid about electronics, you can tell them, hey guys, you're going to be working in a white suit in a room under a microscope looking at these little tiny things, you know, where it's silent and it's a clean room and all that stuff. Or you can tell them, listen, you're going to be working to build these things that are going to go on the space shuttle that we're going to send into outer space, right? Or that's going to build the supercomputer that you carry in your pocket, right? The entire modern world is run by electronics. How is that not a sexy career, right? How is that not something interesting that everyone would wanna do? It baffles me, right? You know, it's an easy conversation to have, I think. And I think you can get kids excited about it if the conversation occurs in the right way and at the right time. You know, career days, my littlest one is, this is last year in elementary school and I love doing these career days in elementary school because for most of the career day, kids are kind of staring there like, all right. Yeah, right. I could be a police officer. I could be this. I could be that. I could be a nurse. And they're kind of like, you know, I'm forced to do this. But you go in there with electronics and you start showing them how, how this stuff works and electricity and everything. And it's, it's brilliant. You know, the reaction that you get from people, because it's something that they understand, it's tangible to them, you know, and we're just not having that conversation with people. You know, we're overly obsessed in this country with the idea that everyone has to go to college. And I'm not bashing college, right? I think it's absolutely the right thing for a lot of people to do. And I'm thankful that I had the opportunity to do it. But it's not the right solution to everyone, right? And even if you do go to college, right? Even if you do become an engineer, there's a lot of opportunity in these industries that are just overlooked, you know? Yes, you can go and work for, you know, a firm that does X, Y, and Z, or you can help put, you know, the next group of humans in space, you can help us get to Mars, you can help us solve, you know, the cancer, you know, you can help us cure cancer by developing the computers, they're going to help map, you know, the human genome and all of that, you know, it's about perspective and we don't have the right conversation with the right people at the right time. 

Kaitlin: Yeah, I think it's really interesting to hear you talk through how you even frame this conversation and all the applied use cases of, you know, here's how we actually use this technology here, all the different use cases for electronics. And so when you think about the skill needs, and you know, whether you're talking to youth or adults about the skill needs in the electronics industry, what's the evolution that you've witnessed? And where are we today? And where do you think we're headed? 

David: That's a great question. So the US is at an interesting kind of crossroads right now. You know, we, for a long time, and part of the reason we have such a big workforce challenge in this country right now, is that we were offshoring so much manufacturing and electronics, right? And we're in the process of reshoring and nearshoring a lot of that manufacturing back. But the manufacturing that we're bringing back is not the manufacturing that left, right? We outsourced at that time, what was low tech, high volume manufacturing, right? And a lot of the manufacturing that is coming back to the United States and that becomes critical from a national security standpoint and things like that is manufacturing that is low-volume high-tech by virtue of the fact that that is the manufacturing that's coming back. We are going to have to change Uh the or the skill set evolves right that is needed There's still a lot of manufacturing work in electronics that is done manually, right? But the semi-manual, right, the hybridization of that technology, very much like what we were talking about in welding, changes the nature of the skillset you need, right? You not only need some of those manual skills, but you also need that understanding of what is going on there, right? What the technology does, what it's supposed to look like when it's done correctly, what does it look like when it's done poorly, right? What are the potential outcomes and issues that may occur? So much of the work in the United States, it revolves around high reliability, you know, or no fail type of electronics, right? You can't have a computer on a plane fail. You can't have a computer that is in a hospital fail. You can't have a chip or a board that is on a weapon system fail, right? And so there's a lot more today that goes into training someone in electronics than there was 30, 40 years ago, right? Just simply because the nature of electronics has evolved. And so like I mentioned a little bit earlier, right? There's a lot more of that theory that goes into it. Beyond that, I think that, and this is an interesting trend that we're starting to see more and more. I'm starting to see organizations in our industry that are not only interested in teaching the specialist that they need today, right? So I need someone that's going to run this machine for me today, but they're interested in teaching that individual as a generalist, right? And I think it's a byproduct of the fact that we scale in very inconsistent ways sometimes, right? You can have one organization that today has to run three or four lines, and by the next six months needs to double the amount of lines they have. And so you can completely retrain your workforce every time you need to make a change, or you can train your workforce to have that flexibility, you know, where you can move people around. The last thing I'd mention about this is, and this is, I think, in particular for, you know, your engineering class, your technician class of worker, technology is evolving at such a rapid rate today. You know, it's exponential at this point, right? We don't have a linear growth in technology. It's an exponential growth. And so the rate at which things change requires that the individual know more on a day to day level in order for the organization as, you know, as a collective to remain relevant. 

Julian: Yeah, your organization has, what is it, 3,200 members, did I say? That's a lot of companies. I imagine there's a tremendous variation from some of the really big ones to the, you know, it's open, and I know there are a lot of smaller ones. So given this, you know, kind of exponential rate of change, what are the challenges and then opportunities that you experience, you know, as you're trying to advance the workforce and learning and development and to meet both present and future skills in these companies. I would imagine there's, you know, we could probably, there's several podcast episodes on this, but I'm interested to hear, like, what are some of the really pressing challenges and also opportunities that you see? 

David: I'd say the biggest challenges we have is that unlike other manufacturing industries, right? We talked about welding, but you can take anything else, right? Take someone who does HVAC, takes someone who's a carpenter, takes someone who welds and or is a machinist, right? These were jobs that while some of that can be outsourced to other countries, right? A lot of it stayed here, right? It was not outsourced by a significant degree. And so because of that over time we had to as a country develop pipelines for that talent right you can go to a CTE high school today and see a mechanics You know program you can see a program for someone that wants to do HVAC for someone that wants to go and become an electrician Right you can go see someone who wants to work as a machinist or that wants to be a painter right there these programs exist all around the United States. They're constantly feeding new workers into the industry But because electronics outsource so much of this manufacturing at a very early stage in our development as an industry, those pipelines never developed, right? And the byproduct of not having a pipeline that feeds you talent is that organizations who should be building electronics are having to go out and recruit new talent and then train them entirely internally, right? And when you train an individual internally to the way you do things, how much of those skills are transferable to your competition across the street? Right? And so we are in a partially because of essentially what's becoming a regionalization of our supply chains, right? We had a global supply chain for decades, right? Things that were, you know, you had one component built in one country that was shipped to another country. You had a third component that was built in a fourth country that was all shipped to a fifth country. And then that gets sent somewhere else to get packaged. And then that gets sent to somewhere else to get sold to the end consumer. COVID accelerated this idea of regional supply chains and that has really caused a reorganization of the global supply chain, right? You couple that with national security concerns that are occurring around the world and geopolitical tensions, and that's requiring countries like the United States to essentially stand up entire supply chains for electronics internally without a workforce and without a mechanism that could feed that workforce that is needed. And so It just puts additional pressure on these organizations to develop this talent and find ways of retaining that talent. And when you're addressing the problem on a one-off basis, right? Company by company, you may have one company that solves their workforce problem, but you're never going to solve the industry's workforce problem in the region because those skills don't become transferable, right? If I get hired by company A in electronics and I work there for 15 years, and I work my way up from an operator to a technician, right? Is company B, if I move over there, gonna recognize that if I don't have a degree, if I don't have certifications, if I don't have validation of that learning. The challenge that we have at IPC is really trying to solve the immediate problem that we have today, because it can't wait, right? We can't wait five years to solve the problem because we need these supply chains stood up today. We need the workforce today. So we're trying to solve the immediate problem. We're trying to put out the houses on fire. We're trying to put it out, right? And at the same time that we're trying to put out the fire, we're trying to put in the systems to ensure that the fire doesn't happen again. Right, and so you're trying to build those long-term pipelines. That's the biggest challenge that we run into, right? Is that there's, this is not, hey guys, we're seeing that in five years, we're gonna have this problem. Or, you know, we should really address this to ensure this doesn't become a challenge in the future. It's really a problem today and we don't have time to waste. I'd say the second big challenge that we have is that, while I'm thankful that electronics is more and more, in particular after COVID, entered into the general consciousness, right? It's entered into the debate at a national level, right? Government is talking about the need for chips. The challenge that we have is that the conversation is hyper-focused on chips. For context, you know, a semiconductor is often called like the brain of the electronic, right? It's the thing that kind of directs all of the mechanisms internally. But it's only one component, right? A brain without a body is nothing, right? It's a brain in the jar, you know? You need to have the rest of that technology to support it, right? So IPC has this philosophy of what we call silicon to systems, right? You need an entire supply chain, not just one part of it. And so while we've allocated money as a nation to address the chip problem, we're only addressing one problem. So if the problem during COVID was we didn't have enough semiconductors, my concern is that five years from now, the problem is we have warehouses of semiconductors with nothing to put them on. Because we don't have the infrastructure to build printed circuit boards in this country. We don't have the packaging workforce to help package that into a final product. We don't have the components we need. We don't have the assembly facilities to actually put it all together and put it into the box, it ends up at the end user. And that hyper focus of that one segment is I think a significant threat that doesn't get talked about enough. You also asked about opportunities. I mean, I think the biggest opportunity here is for people. You know, these are quality careers with a lot of opportunity. You can look at every challenge as a pure challenge or you can look at it as an opportunity, right? When you have a workforce challenge, that means there are a lot of great jobs that are available today with a lot of potential for them to be long-term careers. There's a lot of opportunity to move up in these organizations, to grow in these organizations. And while I can't tell you much, I'm not a futurist, so I can't tell you what the world looks like 30 years from now, I can almost emphatically tell you it will be driven by electronics. 

Kaitlin: Dave, this is tuly a fascinating conversation. And I feel like we could ask so many different follow-up questions. But I'd like to transition us to reflecting on your lessons learned. And I recognize this is kind of an ongoing set of lessons learned for you as you're in this career. But reflecting on your lessons learned to this point, what are practical steps that our audience can take to become forces in positioning intermediary organizations like IPC to effectively drive talent and workforce development because clearly there are so many factors and facets to this work. What would you recommend?  Dave: Going back to an earlier theme, we are hyper focused on this idea of everyone having to go to university. Right, there's a lot of other opportunities for great careers outside of traditional, you know, academic structures, right? And that's where I think these third-party associations provide a lot of opportunities for people. And so, part of it is changing the general conversation, right? To say, you know, university is a great pathway for a lot of people and there's other pathways, you know, for great careers. Changing that conversation, making kids in particular aware that there are these opportunities out there and that they're not these dark and dirty type jobs, right? You know, you can go work at NASA, right? I have the benefit of living very close to Cape Canaveral. And so I get to watch launches, you know, almost every week. And, you know, in my life, I've seen hundreds of them. And every time I look at it, I'm just in wonder, you know, like this is amazing. We're putting people in space. We're putting, we have whole space stations up. It's like Star Trek. It's all my fantasies as a kid, right? We're actually living that today. And so having that conversation and making people aware that they can be part of something bigger than themselves, right, I think is really important. And that starts with everyone. That starts with parents, that starts with guidance counselors, that starts with teachers, you know, growing that awareness, you know, and that's something that today everyone can do, right? Everyone can have that conversation. And I think that that is also, and this is, I don't know if this is an ask as much as it's something that I would hope that the people who listen to this reflect on, you know, is that we normalize a lot of this technology, you know, because we're surrounded by it, right? But you really do have the sum of human knowledge in your pocket, right? And taking a second to just marvel at the things that we can do, I think changes that perspective about manufacturing because there are people who built that, right? There are people who designed that. There are people who thought of that and you could be part of it.

Julian: Wow. I think like you, Kaitlin, those two of us looking at each other here, it's like, wow, so fascinating, so exciting. And I love Dave. There are all these actors in workforce development. I think what you're really demonstrating and showing here is the kind of the role that an intermediary, that a business intermediary can play and really kind of try to broaden this whole notion of how do we help people advance their education and careers. And yeah, it doesn't just have to be traditional. I grew up in an academic family, too. It doesn't have to be that, right. I mean, it's a great thing. I also think there's a whole other conversation about how these worlds are kind of coming together of vocational and academic and a lot of what you're talking about. But we could go on. And unfortunately, we're nearing the end here of our podcast of this episode. And so we'd love to hear from you how our listeners can learn more and continue to follow your work. 

David: IPC.org is the website for IPC. You know, we have an education site on there that kind of lists out everything that we're doing globally to address the workforce challenges in the industry, all the different programs we're doing, all the different initiatives. You could also follow the IPC Education Foundation, which is doing great work with schools and with ensuring that we're building out these pipelines. We just published a white paper that goes into real deep detail into what are the four major challenges. We talked about one of them today, which was kind of the lack of a pipeline. And a second one, which was that that then forces organizations to become education institutions instead of, you know, manufacturers. But it goes into deeper detail into that, into what IPC is doing. So you can go and check that out. You can follow IPC. You can follow me on LinkedIn, although I think I'm a pretty boring follow. So because all I really want to talk about is workforce. But so that's really where you can follow us and what we're doing. If you're interested in getting involved, we have a lot of opportunities for people to volunteer. We have a lot of opportunities for people to help contribute to the prom. But like I said, you don't even need to follow me. You don't need to follow IPC to really be a part of this. It's really just about each of us changing our individual perspectives when it comes to manufacturing, right? When it comes to the idea that America was a nation that was built because we built things, you know? And that is core to our DNA and that sometimes it's easy to forget that.

Kaitlin: Well, that is quite the way to wrap up. Thank you so much, Dave, for all of your insights and your perspective and sharing your lessons learned and we really appreciate you joining us today. 

David: No problem. It's been my pleasure. It's always fun to talk education. 

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.