Are Today’s Engineers Ready To Lead The Future Of Global Technology? Full Time NEW

This article is based on the panel discussion at the EFY Expo in Gujarat 2025 called “Developing Industry-ready Engineers: Innovation, Research & Design Strategies for Academic Institutions”, featuring the opening speech and moderation by Narang N. Kishor, Founder, Mentor, Principal Design Strategist & Architect at Narnix Technolabs. The other speakers included Dr Vishal Dahiya, Director at Sardar Vallabhbhai Global University, Prof. Venkata Chavali and Prof. Sudeep Sharma from IIIT Surat, and Dr Nipun Batra from IIT Gandhinagar. It has been transcribed and curated by Nitisha Dubey, Senior Journalist at EFY.

In India, we have an interesting dichotomy: on one hand, we have too many engineers who are UNEMPLOYED, and on the other, employers say they have a shortage of good engineers. Every year, millions of students pursue engineering, yet only a small fraction secure meaningful employment in their preferred field. For many, education is the primary pathway to achieving their dreams, but not all aspirations translate into reality. As opportunities remain limited and challenges multifaceted and diverse, countless engineers are compelled to set aside their aspirations;sometimes for clear reasons, and sometimes for no clear reason.

While highlighting the challenges, Narang N. Kishor, Founder, Mentor, Principal Design Strategist & Architect at Narnix Technolabs, noted that although India speaks confidently about becoming a global technology leader by 2047, the country still struggles to translate academic learning into real-world engineering competence.

Industry readiness in an AI-driven world

Rapid technological shifts amplify the urgency of this disconnect. As Kishor pointed out, AI-driven automation, low-code and no-code platforms, and autonomous development tools are redefining engineering itself. With over 5.2 million active developers, India leads globally in software talent, but competence and depth remain uneven.

The panel agreed that academia is not fully prepared for this transition. Limited hands-on exposure, weak alignment with industrial practices, and insufficient soft skills continue to widen the gap between graduates and workplace expectations.

Structural gaps and ground realities

Dr Vishal Dahiya of Sardar Vallabhbhai Global University highlighted the stark contrast between elite institutions and colleges in rural or resource-constrained regions. She noted that while national institutions have robust infrastructure, many colleges continue to struggle with outdated laboratories, a shortage of trained faculty, and limited access to industry exposure. Despite multiple rounds of curriculum reforms, she observes that the disconnect between industry expectations and academic instruction has remained unresolved for decades.

She stressed the need for time-aligned collaboration, synchronising academic semesters with industry internship cycles and moving away from theory-centric teaching towards industry-led, real-world problem statements. Dr Dahiya also warned against the risk of students becoming passive consumers of AI tools, urging a greater emphasis on developing active, critical problem-solving capabilities.

Three stakeholders, one shared responsibility

Prof. Sudeep Sharma from the Indian Institute of Information Technology (IIIT), Surat, outlined the critical roles of three key stakeholders: students, academic institutions, and industry and noted that each often waits for the others to take the first step. As a result, when students graduate, they realise that there is no effective bridge between education and employment.

He emphasised the need for students to engage with real-world challenges, noting that they are frequently limited to solving “toy problems” that bear little relevance to actual industrial needs. To address this gap, Prof. Sharma advocated systematically integrating industry problems into the curriculum, beginning with core fundamentals and gradually progressing toward real-world complexity, so that students clearly understand how classroom learning translates into practical industrial solutions.

Beyond technical skills: the human factor

Prof. Venkata Chavali (IIIT Surat) explained that industry readiness is built on three core pillars: strong academic fundamentals, hands-on technical competence, and professional skills. She noted that many students, particularly those from rural backgrounds, struggle with basic communication abilities, which can undermine the prospects of even technically proficient graduates.

She also emphasised the need for syllabus reforms as a critical driver of student development, noting that meaningful and continuous revision should involve faculty professional development, alumni insights, and active industry participation. Acknowledging that curricula cannot be updated annually, Prof. Chavali recommended regular industry-led lectures, workshops, and internships to ensure that students remain connected to rapidly evolving technologies.

Making engineering exciting again

A critical concern raised by Prof. Nipun Batra from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Gandhinagar, was the misplaced emphasis on careers rather than on engineering itself. He questioned why top students from core branches migrate to generic software roles, driven more by brand perception than by technical passion.

According to him, students are excited by what feels “cool,” not necessarily by what is foundational. Injecting curiosity through hands-on hardware projects, constrained design challenges, and real-world problem solving can change this mindset. He also warned against an AI-only focus, arguing that engineers who understand hardware and systems will ultimately leverage AI most effectively.

Industry’s perspective: fundamentals first

From the employer’s side, Mayank Gupta, Founder of Narnix Edge, acknowledged that the industry invests nine to twelve months of training fresh graduates before they become productive. He mentioned that the industry wants not only those engineers who are interested in the job, but also engineers with strong fundamentals and the ability to learn.

“Nowadays, students only copy code or assemble boards without understanding. In fact, they need to learn the core concepts of a project, whether it is electronics or software, and also require system-level thinking in competitive industrial environments”, he added.

Learning from practice, not just degrees

Dr Dahiya and Kishor discussed people who work at the ground level. They have more expertise in everything. While sharing his experience, Kishor mentioned India’s top fashion designers were trained by master craftsmen rather than PhDs, drawing a parallel to engineering education today.

While roles like adjunct faculty and ‘professors of practice’ exist, the panel agreed that institutions rarely leverage them effectively.

Short-term, practical interventions

When the discussion turned to immediate solutions, the panel converged on a few actionable ideas:

• Short, high-intensity sessions by industry practitioners
• Industry-defined problem statements embedded into coursework
• Hands-on labs that prioritise experimentation over theory
• Incentivising students through academic credits and recognition
• Faculty-industry consultancy models that excite teachers as well as students

Dr Vishal mentioned that institutions need to partner with campuses to pool expertise, creating ecosystems rather than isolated efforts.

Internships: quantity vs quality

One audience member raised a concern about superficial internships in which attendance and learning are unmonitored. Kishor responded that short-term internships are not useful. According to him, only semester-long engagements allow students to understand industrial realities meaningfully. Short stints, he said, should focus on exposure; not technical contribution.

Standards, global participation, and value creation

Another audience question highlighted India’s limited participation in global standard-setting bodies such as the IETF. Kishor acknowledged this gap but noted emerging efforts through TSDSI and BIS. He stressed that true collaboration cannot mean industries “dumping problems” on academia—it must be a shared pursuit of future-relevant innovation.

Dirtying hands, not just shaking them

Summing up the discussion, Kishor made a blunt observation: unless industry is willing to get its hands dirty, training, mentoring, and co-creating solutions, the skills gap will persist. Engineering, he reminded the audience, is about enabling societal progress, not chasing short-term credentials.