My daughter is 14. Demographic and economic data suggest her generation has a good chance of living to be 100 and working well into their 70s. This has huge implications for business schools, and specifically executive education and corporate learning.

More than anything else, at least in developed economies, it is likely to mean that business schools will increasingly see a shift in where their income comes from. There will certainly be continuing demand for undergraduate and postgraduate degrees, but learning for those in their 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s will become an ever more important income stream. A recent McKinsey report suggested that as many as 375 million workers may need to switch occupations and consequently need to learn new skills in the next 15 years.

We worked with five global business schools throughout 2018 to look at the future of business education conducting desk research, interviews with employers, and surveys with corporate purchasers of learning and individual learners. The report, Executive Education Futures, has compelling data, but as much as anything it is what employers had to say that signposts the future for business schools around the world.

Learning for those in their 30s, 40s, 50s and 60s will become ever more important

Impact is probably the most important issue for those delivering executive education how does the learning help individuals and organizations grow? For too long impact has often been tick boxes on a happy sheet. Today clear measures of impact are essential for business schools to grow their customer relationships.

In the survey, the top priority when employers consider using a learning provider is ‘learning that enables staff to have an impact at work.’ Individual learners also highlighted ‘learning that will enable me to have an impact back at work.’ Just over half (53%) of the employers responding to the survey always measure impact, while 37% do some measurement of impact.

Measurement of impact is evolving, and perhaps not surprisingly is being driven by technology. Technology is everywhere when it comes to the future of executive education. It is not just being used to assess outcomes at the end of a program but throughout an individual course of study. Technology is allowing much greater personalization of learning, identifying which individuals benefit most from a particular program and using that knowledge to help others who might struggle to do better.

Crucially, they want a partner for the whole learning journey

Of course, technology is also being used to market programs, and increasingly to deliver them. However, as well as an opportunity, it is also a threat to the business school model. According to one employer, individuals won’t pay for learning that they think they can get through an online video for free. With LinkedIn Learning offering over 1,000 business courses online, business schools need to be extremely clear about where they add value to the learning experience.

Strikingly, only 28% of companies said they use business schools for their learning and development, underlining the competitive marketplace facing schools. For firms thinking about using a business school, they are seeking flexibility, value, and an understanding of their needs and culture. Crucially, they want a partner for the whole learning journey rather than an offer based only on individual programs. A joined-up approach is more important than ever. Employers in interviews made it clear that an off-the-shelf proposal consisting of a standardized 50-page slide deck was likely to get very short shrift.

Business schools will need to be flexible, deliver impactful learning, utilize technology, and provide clear value

In competing for corporate learning projects, business schools also need to think about who they might be competing with. In some cases, the competition might come from elsewhere on campus and at a much lower cost, issues of regulation might be covered by the politics department, while manufacturers might seek out the engineering department. In other cases, it will be part of a management consulting firm that may even have its own ‘faculty’ to deliver learning. The competition is increasingly likely to be international, even on a school’s doorstep if it is based in a global city. And, of course, it might also be a new entrant to the marketplace, using technology to curate content, understand learners, deliver programs, building a relationship with companies and individual learners.

For some employers, the brand remains very important. Top business school names still attract executives, keen to have the name on their CV, and believe that the brand means legitimacy for the learning. For others, practical experience in a sector or market weaved in with research-backed evidence will be a compelling proposition.

For individual learners, competition is more than likely to be technology-based. Just under half (46%) indicate that digital and online study as part of their learning was extremely important. Almost 6 out of 10 individuals are already aware of Lynda/LinkedIn Learning, and while only 22% have used the service, a further 38% would consider using it in the future. To date, the most widely used digital providers are Coursera (36%), Udemy (35%) and Udacity (35%).

Business schools need to think clearly about where they have advantages in the learning marketplace. Pedagogy, assessment, content, and course structure are all fields where schools may have an advantage over other providers. However, resting on experience will not be enough. Employers suggested that learning design needs to change to help people do their job more effectively while at work, rather than instruct people away from work and then expect them to return to the office and apply it. One employer went as far as to explain that, “Programs used to be 1 week, now they are one-hour lunches over several weeks. Programs need to be stickier to take hold in these shorter periods.”

Part of the answer for business schools may be partnerships. Some faculty have often worked for consulting firms to deliver executive education for clients, while some business schools have reached beyond their faculty to use adjuncts and others to deliver, providing a bespoke approach to programs.

In the future, business schools may need to go further, recognizing where they are not as strong as they would like to be and drawing in partners either on an ad hoc or permanent basis to add expertise, international reach, technology, or some other dimension to their offer.

If employers, as they suggest in the study, want to create new types of leaders, who can have an impact on their community as well as their company, business schools need to develop new executive education approaches. For one company in the study, that means getting help to develop its learners into teachers, enabling social learning, and getting teams and individuals to be responsible for designing the training that gives them the best return on investment. For another, it is about finding a partner for the journey both up and down the organization, across society, and into the future rather than simply being a program provider. Business schools will need to be flexible, deliver impactful learning, utilize technology, and provide clear value if they are to build an attractive executive education offer. To be successful in the future, it can be argued that business schools just need to stop thinking and acting like business schools and embrace radically new ways of working.