Legislators, Industry Expect “Economic Value” Also . . .
Support for colleges and universities may hinge on meeting community needs
For years, the question of higher education’s “value” has centered on parents and students. When we mention “value,” we don’t mean some vague notion of the growth of a student’s intellect. Instead, as the price of college continues to increase, we mean parents and students are questioning the “economic value” received for four years and thousands of dollars in terms of ROI – “return on investment.”
But lately, a different conversation on the issue of “value” and “ROI” is unfolding—one that’s taking place in the corridors of state capitols and the boardrooms of major employers. Here, the stakes are different, and so are the expectations.
Industry leaders and state governments, as major investors in higher education, are starting to ask: Are we getting “value” for our investment?
Picture a state legislator reviewing the annual budget. Billions are earmarked for public universities, justified by the promise of economic growth and a robust workforce. Across town, a hospital executive sits in a meeting, lamenting yet another year of unfilled nursing positions. In another office, a manufacturing CEO wonders why so many job applicants including those with degrees still need months of on-the-job training before they’re ready to contribute.
These aren’t just anecdotes, but real-world experiences driving a shift in how industry and state governments view their relationship with higher education. For years, they’ve poured resources into colleges and universities, expecting a clear return: graduates who are prepared to fill critical roles, fuel innovation, and keep economies thriving. But as workforce shortages persist and skills mismatches remain stubbornly high, frustration is growing.
The Value Question, Reframed
For parents and students, “value” might mean a good job after graduation or manageable student debt. For industry and state governments, “value” is more concrete:
Are institutions producing enough graduates in the fields we need most?
Do those graduates have the right mix of technical and interpersonal skills?
Are taxpayer and private dollars leading to measurable results?
Increasingly, the answers are complicated.
Healthcare systems scramble to find qualified nurses, technicians and other health care professionals.
Tech companies report a shortage of engineers.
School districts can’t fill teaching positions, even as education majors dwindle.
Meanwhile, some college programs remain crowded, while seats in high-demand fields go unfilled. Employers, frustrated by underprepared applicants, invest more in their own training programs, sometimes bypassing traditional degrees altogether.
This disconnect isn’t going unnoticed. In a growing number of states, legislatures are responding with new policies, tying funding to passage rates on licensure exams, job placements, and workforce data. Old standards such as graduation rates are being pushed aside – as they need to be. Graduating thousands of students in fields that fail to meet the economic needs of the community is not necessarily something to be rewarded.
Instead, legislatures want proof that public investment delivers public benefit.
Industry partners, too, are pushing for a seat at the table. They want to help shape curricula, ensuring students acquire the skills—problem-solving, teamwork, adaptability—that are needed in today’s workplaces. They want more collaboration, more transparency, and more responsiveness to changing economic needs.
Private Colleges Not Exempt
While much of the conversation about higher education value and accountability centers on public institutions, private colleges and universities are also deeply entwined with the needs of business, industry, and philanthropists. These schools may not rely on state appropriations, but they, too, are recipients of substantial external investment from corporate partners seeking talent, and from private benefactors who believe in the transformative power of education
Private colleges have long cultivated relationships with industry leaders who want a direct pipeline to well-prepared graduates. In fields like engineering, healthcare, computer science, and business, corporations frequently fund scholarships, sponsor research, and even help shape curricula. These partnerships can lead to state-of-the-art labs, internship programs, and specialized training initiatives designed to meet real-world workforce needs.
For example, a leading tech company might endow a professorship or fund a new center for artificial intelligence, with the expectation that students will gain hands-on experience in cutting-edge fields. In return, the company gains access to a pool of graduates ready to hit the ground running.
Philanthropic donors also play a significant role in shaping private colleges’ priorities and offerings. Major gifts often come with the expectation of impact such as new academic programs aligned with emerging industries. These benefactors are increasingly focused on measurable outcomes: job placements, innovation, and community needs.
The result is a similar, though differently structured, pressure for accountability as in the public sector. Private colleges must demonstrate their value not only to students and families, but also to the businesses and donors who invest in their futures.
Corporate partners expect a return on investment: graduates equipped for the specific demands of their industries.
Donors want evidence that their contributions are making a tangible difference—in students’ lives, in workforce readiness, and in the broader community.
To meet these expectations, many private institutions are embracing:
Agile curriculum design, often in direct consultation with industry.
Expanded career services and alumni networks to support transitions into high-demand fields.
Innovative programs that blend liberal arts foundations with technical and professional skills.
A Call for Change
The message is clear: This is not business as usual.
State governments are questioning the longstanding practice of “entitlement” funding—automatic support without clear outcomes. Industry leaders are exploring alternatives to the traditional degree pipeline, investing in apprenticeships, certificate programs, and other models that promise faster, more targeted results.
What both groups want is a system that’s nimble and accountable:
Programs designed around real workforce data.
Funding driven by proven outcomes.
Educational models that adapt quickly to the demands of the economy.
Conclusion
The value conversation has grown up.
No longer just a family discussion around the kitchen table, it now includes governors, CEOs, and policymakers who control billions in funding and influence the future of work itself. For colleges and universities, the challenge is clear: Prove your value not just to students, but to the industries and states that depend on your graduates.
The value proposition for private colleges is evolving alongside that of their public counterparts. As business and industry invest more directly in talent pipelines, and as philanthropists seek demonstrable impact, private institutions are under growing pressure to adapt, collaborate, and prove their relevance in a fast-changing economy. In this landscape, the most successful private colleges will be those that can bridge the gap between tradition and transformation—delivering not only a rich educational experience, but also the skills and outcomes that their supporters expect.
If higher education can’t deliver on that promise, its most important investors may look elsewhere. The future of public and private support depends on higher education’s ability to show that it truly delivers what industry and government need most: real, measurable workforce value.