INDUSTRIES: The Demand Side Story (IMC)

Much of education and workforce plannng focuses on the supply side: producing graduates, training workers, and expanding qualifications. But industries tell a different story — one driven by demand

Industries do not simply demand more workers; they demand different capabilities at different stages of maturity. A newly emerging industry may need basic operational skills and foreign technical support. Expanding industries demand scalable workforce systems, supplier coordination, and productivity improvement. Mature industries seek specialization, precision, and innovation capability. Meanwhile, industries facing disruption require adaptability, digital fluency, and continuous reskilling.

This means the real question is not:

“How many workers should we produce?”

but:

“What capabilities does the industry currently need to evolve?”

In order to assist me in answering these types of questions, I've came up with a lens, a perspective to allow me to see the demand side within a 'Maturity' status.

The Industry Maturity Continuum (IMC) is a framework used to understand how industries evolve from formation and growth toward stabilization and reinvention through changes in capability, technology, value chains, and innovation over time.

There are 4 stages in IMC:

Emergence > Expansion > Stabilization > Realignment

At the Emergence stage, industries are still forming and often depend heavily on foreign investment, imported technology, and basic operational capability.

During Expansion, industries scale rapidly, supply chains deepen, SMEs integrate with larger firms, and productivity and quality systems become increasingly important.

In Stabilization, industries become more mature, locally capable, standardized, and innovation-oriented, with stronger specialization, institutional systems, and globally competitive firms.

Finally, Realignment occurs when industries face disruption from forces such as AI, automation, digitalization, green transition, or geopolitical change, forcing industries to reinvent themselves through continuous innovation and adaptation.

Importantly, industries may occupy multiple maturity levels simultaneously. A company may require basic operators in one division, advanced technologists in another, and AI specialists elsewhere. Understanding industries through the demand side shifts education and TVET from merely supplying labor to actively shaping industrial capability, competitiveness, and long-term economic transformation.

Here is a table that defines the IMC and its Industry demands: 

The next question is: 
How should TVET evolve across the IMC?

At the Emergence stage: TVET at this stage focuses mainly on developing basic operational, technical, and workplace competencies needed to support industrial entry and early production systems.

As industries strengthen and scale, they move into Expansion. TVET systems become more structured, industry-linked, and productivity-oriented.

The Stabilization stage reflects deeper industrial maturity. Here TVET evolves beyond workforce supply toward specialization, applied research, and industry collaboration. Countries such as Germany demonstrate how mature industries and mature TVET ecosystems can reinforce one another.

Finally, industries facing disruption enter Realignment.  TVET no longer functions only as a training provider, but increasingly as a lifelong learning and industrial transformation partner that supports continuous reskilling, innovation, and adaptability.

Take Away:
For TVET practitioners, understanding the Demand Side is equally as important as understanding the Supply Side and Mediator Side. Without understanding where industries sit within their maturity journey, TVET risks producing qualifications and workforce capabilities that are disconnected from actual industrial evolution and long-term economic transformation.

Lets see how some nations fare:

 (Disclaimer: The ideas, frameworks, and interpretations presented in this article are intended to encourage discussion and analytical thinking. Any comparative observations or classifications are illustrative in nature and should not be interpreted as definitive statistical measurements or official rankings.)