NEP 2020: Bridging the Paradigm Gap Between Academia and Industry

NEP 2020 represents India's most ambitious attempt to bridge the persistent divide between academic preparation and industry requirements. This research framework positions the policy as both a technical intervention—digitizing credits, restructuring degrees—and a normative transformation—redefining what constitutes valuable knowledge and legitimate credentials in a globalized, technology-disrupted economy. For Commerce and Management education specifically, the stakes are particularly high. These disciplines serve as the primary interface between educational systems and employment markets, yet they have been slow to adapt to the digital transformation of business, the datafication of decision-making, and the sustainability imperatives reshaping corporate practice. NEP 2020 provides the structural architecture for adaptation; this research investigates whether that architecture is being populated with the pedagogical content and institutional practices necessary for genuine transformation. The study's ultimate contribution lies in moving beyond binary assessments of NEP 2020 as "success" or "failure" toward nuanced understanding of implementation variation, contextual adaptation, and incremental progress. By identifying what works, for whom, and under what conditions, the research supports the policy's evolutionary refinement while maintaining its transformative aspirations. The paradigm gap between academia and industry will not close automatically through policy pronouncement. It requires sustained institutional effort, resource commitment, and cultural change. This research provides the empirical foundation and analytical framework to guide that effort, contributing to India's emergence as a global knowledge economy while ensuring that the benefits of educational transformation reach across regions, institutions, and socioeconomic strata.

Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis. University of Chicago Press.Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.Busemeyer, M. R., & Trampusch, C. (2012). The political economy of collective skill formation. Oxford University Press.Collins, R. (1979). The credential society: An historical sociology of education and stratification. Academic Press.Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.Etzkowitz, H., &Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123.Government of India. (2020). National Education Policy 2020. Ministry of Education.Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). SAGE.Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355-374.Vossensteyn, H., et al. (2015). Structural higher education reform: Design and outcomes. University of Twente.