Connect with us

Business

Colleges teach learning, but they’re not learning how to survive

Published

on



American higher education is in the business of knowledge.  But in a fast-moving economy, it is losing touch with the marketplace it is meant to serve.

Rising tuition, declining enrollment, and disappointing employment outcomes have led many to question whether college still delivers on its promise. Dozens of smaller institutions are shuttering or consolidating, caught between rising costs and weakening demand. These are not isolated failures. They are signals of a system in need of reinvention.

The real challenge, however, is not external. It is structural. If higher education is to remain viable in a competitive, post-industrial economy, it must shift from viewing itself as a self-contained enterprise to recognizing its role in the broader talent supply chain.

That shift requires more than programmatic tweaks. It requires a rethinking of priorities.

For much of the past century, colleges and universities have kept industry at arm’s length, operating on the premise that their purpose is to cultivate knowledge for its own sake. Theory was king. Practical application was often treated as peripheral, or worse, vocational. But the world has changed. And so have student expectations.

Today’s graduates face a job market that demands both agility and applied experience. Many are entering the workforce burdened with debt and without the tools to contribute from day one. Students and families are beginning to ask harder questions. Employers, too, are losing patience. We should not be surprised. Higher education is overdue for a course correction.

At many institutions, the idea of aligning more closely with industry is viewed with caution. Some see it as a dilution of academic purpose or a threat to faculty independence. Others simply fear change. But these objections miss the point.

Professional preparation does not have to come at the expense of intellectual rigor. In fact, the most effective workforce-ready graduates are those who can think critically, communicate effectively, and adapt to complexity. These are not soft skills. They are the very traits that rigorous academic study is designed to develop. What is missing is experience.

At Kettering University, where I am president, we have built a model that integrates traditional learning with deep, structured engagement in the workforce. Our cooperative program is not an add-on. It is the foundation of our model, and has been for more than a century. We do not view students as customers. We view them as emerging professionals. And we do not treat employers as donors. We treat them as partners.

Founded in 1919 as The School of Automobile Trades, Kettering became the Flint Institute of Technology before being acquired by General Motors in 1926 and renamed the General Motors Institute. For the next five decades, it served as GM’s primary talent engine, producing generations of engineering and management leaders through a deeply embedded co-op model. In 1945, we added a fifth-year universal thesis requirement, completing our evolution into a full degree-granting university. GM divested in 1982, and in 1998 we became Kettering University, named for Charles F. Kettering, head of GM Research and one of the earliest advocates for professional cooperative education. That legacy still defines us.

Today, every Kettering student alternates over a 4.5-year course of study between intensive 11-week academic terms and 11-week paid professional work placements. They graduate with two-and-a-half years of discipline-specific experience and often over $100,000 in earnings. We partner with more than 600 employers nationwide—including leading firms in mobility, aerospace, and autonomous systems—to deliver this model at scale. Each year, close to 100% of our graduates secure employment within a few months, often with their co-op employers and frequently in leadership-track roles. More than 1,500 alumni currently serve in executive positions across industries, including in the C-suites of Fortune 500 companies.

Kettering’s commitment to cooperative education is not just semantics. It is a shift in orientation. In our model, industry is the client. The student is the product. And our job is to develop that product with both intellectual depth and practical capability.

The most effective way to do that is through cooperative education: formal, mentored, compensated work placements embedded in the academic calendar. The concept is not new. It originated at the University of Cincinnati over a century ago and has been championed by institutions like Northeastern, Drexel, and Antioch. More recently, schools across the country have begun experimenting with summer internships and short-term placements to meet growing demand.

But not all co-op models are created equal. To be more than résumé lines, these programs must rest on a few core principles.

First, they must be integrated with academic content and tied to the student’s chosen field. Second, the work must be substantive and supervised, not clerical. Third, it must be paid, and the employer must be actively involved in shaping the experience. And fourth, there must be sufficient repetition to build mastery, not just exposure.

This edge isn’t gained at the expense of the liberal arts. Courses in philosophy, communication, ethics, economics, and history ground their professional preparation.

And as companies adopt AI broadly to automate more entry-level tasks, expectations for human contributors are rising. Employers now look for graduates who can step into complex, judgment-based roles immediately. The pressure on colleges to produce graduates who are truly ready will only intensify.

The stakes are real for the private sector. As industries face growing talent shortages, the disconnect between academic output and economic need is no longer just an educational issue. It is a national competitiveness issue. Recent federal initiatives, such as the CHIPS and Science Act and expanded NSF investments in STEM education, underscore how urgently national policymakers view the need to strengthen the talent pipeline.

Business leaders have a role to play here. By forming deeper partnerships with academic institutions, shaping co-op programs, investing in student mentorship, and supporting policies that incentivize applied learning, employers can help close the readiness gap. This is not charity. It is strategy.

The future of higher education will be defined by institutions that understand this shift and act on it. Those that remain tethered to legacy assumptions will continue to lose ground. Those that adapt will not only survive, they will produce graduates who are ready to lead.

We are educators. But we must also be learners. And right now, the lesson is clear: relevance is not inherited. It is earned.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

US debt crisis: Most likely fix is severe austerity triggered by a fiscal calamity

Published

on



One way or another, U.S. debt will stop expanding unsustainably, but the most likely outcome is also among the most painful, according to Jeffrey Frankel, a Harvard professor and former member of President Bill Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers.

Publicly held debt is already at 99% of GDP and is on track to hit 107% by 2029, breaking the record set after the end of World War II. Debt service alone is more than $11 billion a week, or 15% of federal spending in the current fiscal year.

In a Project Syndicate op-ed last week, Frankel went down the list of possible debt solutions: faster economic growth, lower interest rates, default, inflation, financial repression, and fiscal austerity. 

While faster growth is the most appealing option, it’s not coming to the rescue due to the shrinking labor force, he said. AI will boost productivity, but not as much as would be needed to rein in U.S. debt.

Frankel also said the previous era of low rates was a historic anomaly that’s not coming back, and default isn’t plausible given already-growing doubts about Treasury bonds as a safe asset, especially after President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff shocker.

Relying on inflation to shrink the real value of U.S. debt would be just as bad as a default, and financial repression would require the federal government to essentially force banks to buy bonds with artificially low yields, he explained.

“There is one possibility left: severe fiscal austerity,” Frankel added.

How severe? A sustainable U.S. debt trajectory would entail elimination of nearly all defense spending or almost all non-defense discretionary outlays, he estimated.

For the foreseeable future, Democrats are unlikely to slash top programs, while Republicans are likely to use any fiscal breathing room to push for more tax cuts, Frankel said.

“Eventually, in the unforeseeable future, austerity may be the most likely of the six possible outcomes,” he warned. “Unfortunately, it will probably come only after a severe fiscal crisis. The longer it takes for that reckoning to arrive, the more radical the adjustment will need to be.”

The austerity forecast echoes an earlier note from Oxford Economics, which said the expected insolvency of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds by 2034 will serve as a catalyst for fiscal reform.

In Oxford’s view, lawmakers will seek to prevent a fiscal crisis in the form of a precipitous drop in demand for Treasury bonds, sending rates soaring.

But that’s only after lawmakers try to take the more politically expedient path by allowing Social Security and Medicare to tap general revenue that funds other parts of the federal government.

“However, unfavorable fiscal news of this sort could trigger a negative reaction in the US bond market, which would view this as a capitulation on one of the last major political openings for reforms,” Bernard Yaros, lead U.S. economist at Oxford Economics, wrote. “A sharp upward repricing of the term premium for longer-dated bonds could force Congress back into a reform mindset.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

The $124 trillion Great Wealth Transfer is intensifying as inheritance jumps to a new record

Published

on



Nearly $300 billion was inherited this year as the Great Wealth Transfer picks up speed, showering family members with immense windfalls.

According to the latest UBS Billionaire Ambitions Report, 91 heirs inherited a record-high $297.8 billion in 2025, up 36% from a year ago despite fewer inheritors.

“These heirs are proof of a multi-year wealth transfer that’s intensifying,” Benjamin Cavalli, head of Strategic Clients & Global Connectivity at UBS Global Wealth Management, said in the report.

Western Europe led the way with 48 individuals inheriting $149.5 billion. That includes 15 members of two “German pharmaceutical families,” with the youngest just 19 years old and the oldest at 94.

Meanwhile, 18 heirs in North America got $86.5 billion, and 11 in South East Asia received $24.7 billion, UBS said.

This year’s wealth transfer lifted the number of multi-generational billionaires to 860, who have total assets of $4.7 trillion, up from 805 with $4.2 trillion in 2024.

Wealth management firm Cerulli Associates estimated last year that $124 trillion worldwide will be handed over through 2048, dubbing it the Great Wealth Transfer. More than half of that amount will come from high-net-worth and ultra-high-net-worth people.

Among billionaires, UBS expects they will likely transfer about $6.9 trillion by 2040, with at least $5.9 trillion of that being passed to children, either directly or indirectly.

While the Great Wealth Transfer appears to be accelerating, it may not turn into a sudden flood. Tim Gerend, CEO of financial planning giant Northwestern Mutual, told Fortune’s Amanda Gerut recently that it will unfold more gradually and with greater complexity

“I think the wealth transfer isn’t going to be just a big bang,” he said. “It’s not like, we just passed peak age 65 and now all the money is going to move.”

Of course, millennials and Gen Zers with rich relatives aren’t the only ones who sat to reap billions. More entrepreneurs also joined the ranks of the super rich.

In 2025, 196 self-made billionaires were newly minted with total wealth of $386.5 billion. That trails only the record year of 2021 and is up from last year, which saw 161 self-made individuals with assets of $305.6 billion.

But despite the hype over the AI boom and startups with astronomical valuations, some of the new U.S. billionaires come from a range of industries.

UBS highlighted Ben Lamm, cofounder of genetics and bioscience company Colossal; Michael Dorrell, cofounder and CEO of infrastructure investment firm Stonepeak; as well as Bob Pender and Mike Sabel, cofounders of LNG exporter Venture Global.

“A fresh generation of billionaires is steadily emerging,” UBS said. “In a highly uncertain time for geopolitics and economics, entrepreneurs are innovating at scale across a range of sectors and markets.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Apple rocked by executive departures, with chip chief at risk of leaving next

Published

on



Apple Inc., long the model of stability in Silicon Valley, is suddenly undergoing its biggest personnel shake-up in decades, with senior executives and key engineers both hitting the exits.

In just the past week, Apple’s heads of artificial intelligence and interface design stepped down. Then the company announced that its general counsel and head of governmental affairs were leaving as well. All four executives have reported directly to Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook, marking an exceptional level of turnover in Apple’s C-suite. 

And more changes are likely coming. Johny Srouji — senior vice president of hardware technologies and one of Apple’s most respected executives — recently told Cook that he is seriously considering leaving in the near future, according to people with knowledge of the matter. Srouji, the architect of Apple’s prized in-house chips effort, has informed colleagues that he intends to join another company if he ultimately departs.

At the same time, AI talent has been fleeing for tech rivals — with Meta Platforms Inc., OpenAI and a variety of startups poaching many of Apple’s engineers. That threatens to hamper the company’s efforts to catch up in artificial intelligence, an area where it’s struggled to make a mark. 

It all adds up to one of the most tumultuous stretches of Cook’s tenure. Though the CEO himself is unlikely to leave imminently, the company has to rebuild its ranks and figure out how to thrive in the AI era. 

Within the company, some of the departures are cause for deep concern — with Cook looking to stave off more with stronger compensation packages for key talent. In other cases, the exits just reflect the fact that veteran executives are nearing retirement age. Still, many of the shifts constitute a disconcerting brain drain.

While Cook maintains that Apple is working on the most innovative product lineup in its history — a slate that’s expected to include foldable iPhones and iPads, smart glasses, and robots — Apple hasn’t launched a successful new product category in a decade. That leaves it vulnerable to poaching from a range of nimbler rivals better equipped to develop the next generation of devices around AI.

A spokesperson for Cupertino, California-based Apple declined to comment.

The exit of Apple’s AI chief, John Giannandrea, followed a number of stumbles in generative AI. The company’s Apple Intelligence platform has suffered from delays and subpar features. And a highly touted overhaul to the Siri voice assistant is roughly a year and a half behind schedule. Moreover, the software will rely heavily on a partnership with Alphabet Inc.’s Google to fill the gaps in its capabilities.

Against that backdrop, Apple began phasing Giannandrea out of his role in March but is allowing him to remain until next spring.

Within Apple, employees have long expected Giannandrea to step aside — and some have expressed surprise that he’s sticking around as long as he is.

But parting ways with Giannandrea sooner would have been taken as public acknowledgment of a problem, people familiar with the situation said. 

Design veteran Alan Dye, meanwhile, is heading to Meta’s Reality Labs unit — a remarkable defection to one of Apple’s fiercest rivals.

Within a day of that news, Apple turned around and announced that it had poached one of Meta’s executives. Jennifer Newstead, chief legal officer at the social networking company, will become Apple’s general counsel. She helped oversee Meta’s successful antitrust battle with the US Federal Trade Commission — experience that’s likely to prove useful in Apple’s own legal fight with the Justice Department over alleged anticompetitive practices.

Read More: Apple Taps Meta Lawyer as General Counsel in Latest Shake-Up

Newstead is taking over for Kate Adams, who served eight years in the role and will retire in late 2026. Lisa Jackson, vice president for environment, policy and social initiatives, is retiring as well — and her duties will be divided up among other executives. 

Though the news of Adams’ departure was jarring — especially considering the number of Apple legal disputes currently on her plate — she’s had a fairly long tenure for a general counsel at the company.

Jackson, meanwhile, was widely expected to be leaving soon. The former Obama administration official has kept a lower profile during President Donald Trump’s second term, opting to dispatch deputies to handle discussions with the White House. Bloomberg News had previously reportedthat she was considering retirement.

These exits follow an even bigger departure. Jeff Williams, Cook’s longtime No. 2, retired last month after a decade as chief operating officer. Another veteran leader, Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri, stepped into a smaller role at the start of 2025 and is likely to retire in the not-too-distant future.

The flurry of retirements reflects a demographic reality for Apple. Many of its most senior executives have been at the company for decades and are roughly the same age — either in their 60s or nearing it.

Cook turned 65 last month, fueling speculation that he would join the exodus. People close to the executive have said that he’s unlikely to leave soon, though succession planning has been underway for years. John Ternus, Apple’s 50-year-old hardware engineering chief, is considered by employees to be the frontrunner CEO candidate.

When Cook does step down, he’s likely to shift into the chairman job and maintain a high level of influence over the iPhone maker. That makes it unlikely that Apple will select an outsider as the next CEO, even as executives like Nest Labs founder Tony Fadell are being pushed as candidates by people outside the company. Though Fadell helped invent Apple’s iconic iPod, he left the tech giant 15 years ago on less-than-friendly terms. 

For now, Cook remains active at Apple and travels extensively on behalf of the company. However, the executive does have an unexplained tremor that causes his hands to shake from time to time — something that’s been discussed among Apple employees in recent months.

The shaking has been noticed by both executives and rank-and-file staff during meetings and large company gatherings, according to people familiar with the matter. But people close to Cook say he is healthy and refute rumors to the contrary that have circulated in Silicon Valley.

Read More: The Apple Insiders in the Running to Succeed Cook

A more imminent risk is the departure of Srouji, the chip chief. Cook has been working aggressively to retain him — an effort that included offering a substantial pay package and the potential of more responsibility down the road. One scenario floated internally by some executives involves elevating him into the role of chief technology officer. Such a job — overseeing a wide swath of both hardware engineering and silicon technologies — would potentially make him Apple’s second-most-powerful executive.

But that change would likely require Ternus to be promoted to CEO, a step the company may not be ready to take. And some within Apple have said that Srouji would prefer not to work under a different CEO, even with an expanded title.

If Srouji does depart, which isn’t yet a certainty, the company would likely tap one of his two top lieutenants — Zongjian Chen or Sribalan Santhanam — to replace him.

The recent shifts are already reshaping Apple’s power structure. More authority is now flowing to a quartet of executives: Ternus, services chief Eddy Cue, software head Craig Federighi and new COO Sabih Khan. Apple’s AI efforts have been redistributed across its leadership, with Federighi becoming the company’s de facto AI chief.

Ternus is also poised to take a starring role next year in the celebration of Apple’s 50th anniversary, further raising his profile. And he’s been given more responsibility over robotics and smart glasses — two areas seen as future growth drivers. 

Further reorganization is likely. Deirdre O’Brien, head of retail and human resources, has been with Apple for more than 35 years, while marketing chief Greg Joswiak has spent four decades at the company. Apple has elevated the key lieutenants under both executives, preparing for their eventual retirements.

At the same time, Apple is contending with a talent drain in its engineering ranks. This has become a serious concern for the executive team, and Apple’s human resources organization has been instructed to ramp up recruitment and retention efforts, people familiar with the situation said.

Robby Walker, who had overseen Siri and an initiative to build a ChatGPT-like search experience, left the company in October. His replacement, Ke Yang, departed after only weeks in the job, joining Meta’s new Superintelligence Labs.

To help fill the void left by Giannandrea, Apple hired Google and Microsoft Corp. alum Amar Subramanya as vice president of artificial intelligence. He’ll report to Federighi, the software chief.

But there’s been a broader collapse within Apple’s artificial intelligence organization, spurred by the departure of AI models chief Ruoming Pang. Pang, along with colleagues such as Tom Gunter and Frank Chu, went to Meta, which has used eye-popping compensation packages to lure talent.

Roughly a dozen other top AI researchers have left the organization, which is suffering from low morale. The company’s increasing use of external AI technology, such as Google’s Gemini, has been a particular concern for employees working on large language models.

Apple’s AI robotics software team has also seen widespread departures, including its leader Jian Zhang, who likewise joined Meta. That group is tasked with creating underlying technology for products such as a tabletop robot and a mobile bot.

The hardware team for the tabletop device, code-named J595, has been bleeding talent too — with some headed to OpenAI. Dye also was a key figure overseeing that product’s software design.

Read More: Apple’s AI Push to Hinge on Robots, Security, Lifelike Siri

The user interface organization has been hit as well, with several team members leaving between 2023 and this year. That attrition culminated in Dye’s exit, which stemmed partly from a desire to integrate AI more deeply into products and a feeling that Apple hasn’t been keeping pace in the area. Another top interface leader under Dye, Billy Sorrentino, also left for Meta.

The hardware side of the design group — the team responsible for the physical look and feel of Apple’s products — has been nearly wiped out over the last half-decade. Many staffers followed former design chief Jony Ive to his studio, LoveFrom, or went to other companies.

Longtime interface designer Stephen Lemay is now stepping in as Dye’s replacement. Cook is also taking on more responsibility for overseeing design, a role that had been held by Williams.

Ive, a visionary designer who helped create the iPhone, iPad and Apple Watch, is now working with OpenAI to develop a new generation of AI-enhanced devices. That company acquired Ive’s startup, io, for more than $6 billion to jump-start its hardware business — setting its sights on Apple’s territory.

Like Meta, OpenAI has become a key beneficiary of Apple’s talent flight. The San Francisco-based company has hired dozens of Apple engineers across a wide range of fields, including people working on the iPhone, Mac, camera technology, silicon design, audio, watches and the Vision Pro headset. 

In a previously unreported development, the AI company is hiring Apple’s Cheng Chen, a senior director in charge of display technologies. His purview included the optics that go into the Vision Pro headset. OpenAI recruited Tang Tan, one of Apple’s top hardware engineering executives, two years ago.

Read More: Apple’s Star Designer Who Introduced iPhone Air Leaves Company

And over the summer, the company lost the dean of Apple University, the internal program designed to preserve the company’s culture and practices after the passing of co-founder Steve Jobs. Richard Locke, who spent nearly three years at Apple, left to become dean of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s business school.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.