Teaching, Research, Skills: The New Confusion Matrix in Higher Education

 Dear Friends,

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to attend the AACSB CEO’s Business Schools Meet in New Delhi. Ms. Lily Bi, President and CEO of AACSB, delivered an insightful presentation on the current state of management education and institutional readiness. In my view, these insights are not limited to management alone; they apply to several other domains as well.

Employers are shifting dramatically toward skills-first hiring — a 25% rise globally since 2022 — and 27% of employers have removed degree requirements (SHRM 2025). The top skill gaps identified across undergraduates, postgraduates, and managers include navigating ambiguity, communication skills, and the ability to apply feedback.

The most interesting and insightful data point was about what students value most. Faculty teaching quality is the top contributor (23%). Curriculum relevance to current business trends follows closely (21%). Experiential learning through projects and internships adds strong value (16%). Student community and networking matter significantly (12%). Career services and employability support are equally important (12%). International exposure—exchange programs and global faculty—adds moderate value (7%). Access to technology and AI tools influences learning (5%). Research opportunities contribute modestly (4%).

After understanding these priorities in the age of AI, as a teacher, I am left with new questions.

When institutions depend heavily on student fees, and when we are all living in a consumer-first world, what should be the priorities of a teacher? Undoubtedly, a teacher should be passionate about teaching. A teacher should be a storyteller who meaningfully engages the classroom. A teacher must possess strong conceptual understanding of the subject. They must demonstrate communication skills, classroom management skills, empathy and patience, a student-centred approach, and creativity.

In a small group conversation, we discussed the role of research.

The moot question was: Should a teacher also be a researcher in the age of AI? The underlying assumption is that AI’s intelligence is slowly surpassing human intelligence. Industry and research institutions are also simultaneously conducting significant research and developing advanced solutions.

The teacher’s required skill set is already demanding. If the teacher must also become a researcher (on top of competing with AI’s research capabilities and human researchers), when will they have the time to master those core six teaching skills? A school teacher is never a researcher, but rather a creative engager. Ten years ago, when AI was non-existent, higher education required a teacher-cum-researcher. However, today, do we really need this model, especially when students can independently leverage AI-driven research outputs? Or should the teacher’s role shift towards being a facilitator, motivator, or inspirer with strong application orientation?

This brings us to the big confusion matrix:

·       Many ranking frameworks demand research first.
·       Students demand teaching first.
·       Industry demands skills first.

If institutions don’t solve this puzzle thoughtfully, they may pay a hefty price. Those who solve it will create history. Those who ignore it will remain in history.

Note: These are my personal views.

Ravi Saripalle