Why India’s Massive Skilling Push Has Yet to Become Aspirational

Over the last decade, India has quietly built one of the world’s largest skilling ecosystems. Flagship schemes have trained millions, institutions have proliferated, and public spending has steadily risen. Yet for most young Indians, skilling remains a fallback — not a first-choice pathway to mobility or dignity. The gap between scale and aspiration is now the central challenge confronting India’s workforce strategy.

A decade of scale, but limited transformation

Between 2015 and 2025, India’s flagship programme — Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana — trained and certified roughly 1.40 crore candidates. In sheer numbers, few countries have attempted skilling at this scale.

But outcomes tell a more sobering story. Data from the Periodic Labour Force Survey show that wage gains from vocational training remain modest and inconsistent, especially in the informal sector where most trainees ultimately find work. Certifications often fail to translate into higher earnings, job security, or visible improvements in quality of life. As a result, skilling has not become aspirational in the way degrees or government jobs remain.

The education–skilling disconnect

India’s Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education stands at around 28%. The National Education Policy 2020 sets an ambitious target of 50% by 2035. Reaching this goal cannot rely on expanding conventional academic degrees alone.

Despite years of policy emphasis, only about 4.1% of India’s workforce has received formal vocational training — up only marginally from about 2% a decade ago. This contrasts sharply with OECD countries, where vocational education is deeply embedded in formal schooling. In several European economies, vocational tracks account for 60–70% of upper-secondary enrolments.

In India, post-degree skilling is still not a mainstream behaviour. The India Skills Report 2025 underscores that graduates rarely return for structured skill certification unless compelled by job loss or employer mandates. Skilling, in effect, sits outside the education mainstream — treated as remedial rather than progressive.

Why industry remains a reluctant partner

Ironically, industry is the single largest beneficiary of effective skilling. High attrition rates — often 30–40% across retail, logistics, hospitality, and manufacturing — impose heavy costs through repeated hiring, long onboarding cycles, and lost productivity.

Yet most employers do not treat public skilling certifications as reliable hiring signals. Instead, they rely on internal training pipelines, referrals, or private platforms. Even schemes such as the National Apprenticeship Promotion Scheme, while expanding participation, show uneven uptake — particularly among large firms.

The deeper problem is structural: industry is neither strongly incentivised nor obligated to co-design curricula, assessment standards, or certification benchmarks. As long as skilling is something industry merely consumes — rather than co-owns — it will remain misaligned with labour-market reality.

The structural failure of Sector Skill Councils

The most consequential weakness in India’s skilling architecture lies with the Sector Skill Councils (SSCs). These bodies were envisioned as industry-facing institutions that would define standards, ensure relevance, and anchor employability outcomes.

That mandate has not been fulfilled. Today, the skilling value chain is fragmented: one entity trains, another assesses, SSCs certify, and placements — if they occur — are handled separately. Accountability is diffused, and reputational risk is minimal.

This stands in contrast to higher education institutions or polytechnic colleges, where poor outcomes eventually erode credibility. Employer surveys consistently suggest that SSC certifications carry limited signalling value compared to degrees or prior work experience.

What industry-led certification gets right

Global industry-led certifications highlight what is missing. Credentials from platforms like AWS or Google Cloud work because the certifier’s credibility is directly at stake. Assessments are rigorous, graded rather than binary, and employers know exactly what a certified candidate can deliver.

SSCs were meant to play a similar role at a national scale — setting trusted benchmarks for job readiness. Instead, they have largely confined themselves to standards creation, without owning employability outcomes. Until SSCs are held accountable for placement and performance, certification will remain symbolic rather than economic.

From welfare programme to growth engine

India’s skilling challenge is not one of intent or funding, but of accountability. Expanding apprenticeships and embedding skilling within formal degrees offer the fastest route to relevance. Schemes such as PM-SETU, aimed at modernising ITIs, point toward execution models where industry ownership is built into design rather than added later.

When skills are integrated into education pathways, when employers become co-creators rather than passive consumers, and when certifying bodies are answerable for outcomes, skilling can shift from a fragmented welfare intervention to a pillar of economic strategy.

At stake is more than employability. It is the dignity of labour, productivity growth, and India’s ability to convert its demographic scale into sustained national prosperity.