When the Centre Lists 11 Gaps in Skilling, I Hear an Old Conversation Repeating

The Centre has recently flagged 11 gaps in skilling India’s workforce for a Viksit Bharat. Reading that, I felt a jolt of déjà vu — not because the problem is new, but because many of those gaps echo the same themes I have been writing about for years. The Economic Times coverage of skill-development issues and related reports remind me how persistent and structural this challenge is (Economic Times — Skill Development).

The gaps cluster into familiar, stubborn realities

I haven't claimed any special prophetic power — only persistence. When I read the list of gaps, they fell neatly into categories I keep returning to:

• Mismatch between training content and industry needs — theoretical certificates without workplace readiness. This is the very issue raised in studies about future-ready markets and in my reflections on apprenticeships (India among most ready-to-recruit markets for in-demand skills: Study).
• Poor emphasis on apprenticeships and on-the-job learning — training divorced from experience fails to create employable talent (Skills Report 2021).
• Digital and technology readiness gaps — infrastructure without digital-literacy and localized curricula will not close the divide (Digital India Common Service Center).
• Shortage of qualified trainers and poor quality assurance in training delivery.
• Weak industry–academia linkages and limited mechanisms for forecasting future skills.
• Urban–rural and gender divides that exclude large talent pools from opportunity.

These are not abstract bullet points on a slide. They are lived realities — the trainee who finishes a course but cannot get a job because nobody taught interview-readiness; the village CSC that has a computer kiosk but no curriculum to create a micro-entrepreneur; the industry that cannot find people who can operate a digital shopfloor. I have written about each of these strands before, often proposing concrete ways to tackle them (Skill India may be expanded to include AI, IoT; Common Service Centers going Digital).

Why this feels both validating and frustrating

The core idea I want to underscore is simple: I had brought up these thoughts and suggested solutions years ago. I flagged the mismatch between policy rhetoric and ground reality; I urged scale-up of apprenticeships and pragmatic linkages between training providers and industry; I argued for turning digital access into digital capability for rural citizens. Seeing the Centre now list these gaps feels like validation — but it also stings because identification without sustained, systemic action keeps us stuck.

(If you want to read my earlier notes on these themes, see my pieces on apprenticeships and on reorganizing digital hubs: Apprentices — Hire Any Number Without Delay, Organizing the Unorganized, and my commentary on digital villages (Govt plans Rs 15,000 cr investment for one lakh digital villages).)

What really matters now — a few blunt observations

• Naming gaps is only the first act. The harder work is converting that diagnosis into durable incentives and governance practices that force alignment — between what industry needs, what training delivers, and what job markets reward.

• Apprenticeships must be treated as primary, not peripheral. I have argued repeatedly that real learning happens at the workplace; governments and industry must underwrite the cost of training until absorptive capacity and demand are demonstrably created (Skills Report 2021).

• Digital infrastructure without curricula and trainers is just expensive hardware. The Digital India push and the Common Service Centers are potentially transformative only if they carry a parallel, localized skilling program that leads to self-employment and micro-enterprise (Digital India Common Service Center).

• Forecasting matters. We can no longer train to yesterday’s jobs. A national platform to identify and disseminate in-demand skills — an idea I flagged earlier — should be operational, updated in real time, and binding on public training curricula (Predicting Skills Requirements).

A final, personal note

I keep returning to this topic because it sits at the intersection of dignity, livelihood and national ambition. Skilling is not a narrow economic exercise; it is how we equip ordinary people to participate in a future that is rapidly changing. When the Centre lists 11 gaps, it is a necessary wake-up call. When those gaps mirror things I urged years ago, it is a call to move beyond repetition — toward durable, measurable change.

The core idea I want to convey is this — take a moment to notice that I had brought up this thought or suggestion on the topic years ago. I had already predicted this outcome or challenge, and I had even proposed a solution at the time. Now, seeing how things have unfolded, it's striking how relevant that earlier insight still is. Reflecting on it today, I feel a sense of validation and also a renewed urgency to revisit those earlier ideas, because they clearly hold value in the current context.

---

Regards,
Hemen Parekh