logo

Articles

Vol. 3 No. 2 (2023): Teaching practices in times of digital transformation

Future work skills response: A teaching transformation using agility and evidence

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.9b1a2982
Submitted
11 August 2026
Published
15-08-2026

Abstract

Employers are faced with multiple challenges in the workplace, managing and resolving complex problems in the context of a rapidly changing world. As the workplace, and the nature of work becomes more uncertain, we need to develop a rich and diverse skill set amongst employees, to enable them to effectively engage with these challenges.

Universities have recently positioned themselves in competitive markets, via a variety of selling points including employability, or cost-effective quality provision. These economic strategies have accompanied recent expansions in online delivery options facilitated through technological enhancements. New media platforms and ‘marketised’ ideas for delivering pedagogy and assessments have resulted in a proliferation of digital equivalence ‘solutions’ to traditional face-to-face or blended teaching approaches. This process was exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic which forced university teaching academics to produce online provisions for existing degree curriculum. However, the response to employers and employees’ needs for digital transformation has been slower, mainly because the impact on work skills requirements for the future, post pandemic, was unclear as organisations fought for survival in these turbulent times.

We describe how a leading blended learning university, reputed for large scale generic courses, responded to this need by supporting an in-house project team to develop a range of bespoke online short courses. We detail the learning design approach, accommodating the constraints Covid-19 had on face-to-face meetings while applying both design and systems thinking. The team developed online creative workshops with industry stakeholders to uncover the work skills deficit and leveraged this learning to co-create, develop, and launch online short courses which responded to employers’ specific skills development needs. The paper contributes to teaching and digital transformation by illustrating a holistic learning design process using a combination of design and systems thinking providing an enhanced user experience design in a digital environment.

References

  1. Aboites, H. (2010). Latin American universities and the Bologna process: From commercialisation to the Tuning competencies project. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 8(3), 443e455. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2010.505107
  2. Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1991). The Social Construction of Reality. London: Penguin.
  3. Brown, T. (2009) Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation. NY: Harper Business.
  4. Burningham, K., & Cooper, G. (1999). Being constructive: Social constructionism and the environment. Sociology, 33(2), 296-316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/S0038038599000280
  5. Bury, M. R. (1986). Social constructionism and the development of medical sociology. Sociology of Health & Illness, 8(2), 137-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.ep11340129
  6. Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84. http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781474282932.0020
  7. Carroll, F., & Kop, R. (2011). A learning, research and development framework to design for a ‘holistic’ learning experience. E-Learning and Digital Media, 8(4), 315-326. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2011.8.4.315
  8. Checkland, P. (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Wiley.
  9. Checkland, P. (1999). Systems thinking. In W. Currie & B. Galliers (Eds.), Rethinking Management Information Systems (pp. 45-56). Oxford University Press.
  10. Checkland, P. (2000). Systems thinking, systems practice: includes a 30-year retrospective. Journal-Operational Research Society, 51(5), 647-647.
  11. Chong, E., Handscomb, C., Williams, O., Hall, R., & Rooney, M. (2020). Agile resilience in the UK: Lessons from COVID-19 for the ‘next normal’. McKinsey and Company.
  12. Collins, H. (2013). Can design thinking still add value? Design Management Review, 24(2), 35-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/drev.10239
  13. Collins, H. (2018). Creative Research: The theory and practice of research for the creative industries. Bloomsbury Publishing.
  14. Collins, H. J., Glover, H., & Myers, F. (2022). Behind the digital curtain: a study of academic identities, liminalities and labour market adaptations for the ‘Uber-isation’ of HE. Teaching in Higher Education, 27(2), 201-216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1706163
  15. Conole, G. (2010) Learning Design: Making practice explicit. Keynote speech at ConnectEd 2010 – Second International Conference on Design Education, Sydney, 28 June–1 July.
  16. Crites, K., & Rye, E. (2020). Innovating language curriculum design through design thinking: A case study of a blended learning course at a Colombian university. System, 94, 102334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102334
  17. Crosby, A., Fam, D., & Mellick Lopes, A. (2018). Transdisciplinarity and the ‘living lab model’: Food waste management as a site for collaborative learning. In Transdisciplinary theory, practice and education: The art of collaborative research and collective learning (p. 117-131). Springer, Cham.
  18. Cross, N. (2011). Design Thinking: Understanding How Designers Think and Work. Bloomsbury Academic. http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781474293884
  19. De Langhe, B., Puntoni, S., & Larrick, R. P. (2017). Linear thinking in a nonlinear world. Harvard Business Review, 2017(May-June), 11.
  20. Denzin, N. K. (2008). The landscape of qualitative research (Vol. 1, pp. 292-331). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  21. Dervin, B. (1976). The Development of Strategies for Dealing with the Information Needs of Urban Residents: Phase I; Citizen Study. Final Report.
  22. Dictionary, M. W. (2002). Merriam-Webster. On-line at http://www. mw. com/home..
  23. Gartner (2023). 9 future work trends for 2023, https://www.gartner.com/en/articles/9-future-of-work-trends-for-2023 (accessed 5th February 2023)
  24. Geertz, C. (1973). Chapter 1/Thick Description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays, 3-30. Basic Books.
  25. Gonen, E. (2020). Tim brown, Change by design: how design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation (2009). Markets, Globalization & Development Review, 4(2).
  26. Liedtka, J. (2018). Why design thinking works. Harvard Business Review, 96(5), 72-79.
  27. Lund, S., Madgavkar, A., Manyika, J., Smit, S., Ellingrud, K., Meaney, M., & Robinson, O. (2021). The future of work after COVID-19. McKinsey Global Institute, 18.
  28. Manyika, J., Lund, S., Chui, M., Bughin, J., Woetzel, J., Batra, P., ... & Sanghvi, S. (2017). Jobs lost, jobs gained: Workforce transitions in a time of automation. McKinsey Global Institute, 150.
  29. Manyika, J., & Sneader, K. (2018). AI, automation, and the future of work: Ten things to solve for. Executive Briefing. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/future-of-work/ai-automation-and-the-future-of-work-ten-things-to-solve-for (accessed 5th February 2023)
  30. McKenney, S., Kali, Y., Markauskaite, L., & Voogt, J. (2015). Teacher design knowledge for technology enhanced learning: An ecological framework for investigating assets and needs. Instructional Science, 43, 181e202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9337-2
  31. Munro, M. (2018). The complicity of digital technologies in the marketisation of UK higher education: exploring the implications of a critical discourse analysis of thirteen national digital teaching and learning strategies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0093-2
  32. Nagel, R. L., Gipson, K. G., & Ogundipe, A. (2017). Integrating sustainable design and systems thinking throughout an engineering curriculum. In Decision management: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 1607-1624). IGI Global. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1837-2.ch075
  33. Orafi, S., & Borg, S. (2009). Intentions and realities in implementing communicative curriculum reform. System, 37(2), 243e253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.11.004
  34. Pohl, C., Pearce, B., Mader, M., Senn, L., & Krütli, P. (2020). Integrating systems and design thinking in transdisciplinary case studies. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 29(4), 258-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.14512/gaia.29.4.11
  35. Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., Guàrdia, L., & Koole, M. (2020). Online university teaching during and after the Covid-19 crisis: Refocusing teacher presence and learning activity. Postdigital Science and Education, 2, 923-945.
  36. Ries, E. (2012). Lean startup: adoptez l'innovation continue. Pearson.
  37. Rittel, H.W. J., M.M.Webber. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
  38. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-618X.2000.tb00391.x
  39. Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism. In Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 189-213). SAGE Publishing.
  40. Troudi, S., & Alwan, F. (2010). Teachers’ feelings during curriculum change in the United Arab Emirates: Opening Pandora's box. Teacher Development, 14(1), 107e121. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664531003696659
  41. Volini, E., Hatfield, S., & Scoble-Williams, N. (2021). From survive to thrive: The future of work in a post-pandemic world [pdf]. Deloitte. Available at: https://www2.deloitte.com/ie/en/pages/human-capital/articles/From%20survive%20to%20thrive-%20The%20Future%20of%20work%20in%20a%20post-pandemic%20world.html [Accessed 14 August 2021].
  42. Williamson, B., Eynon, R., & Potter, J. (2020). Pandemic politics, pedagogies and practices: digital technologies and distance education during the coronavirus emergency. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(2), 107-114. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1761641