A fit-gap analysis of E-business curricula vs. industry needs
Research output: Journal Publications and Reviews › RGC 21 - Publication in refereed journal › peer-review
Author(s)
Detail(s)
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 167-177 |
Journal / Publication | Communications of the ACM |
Volume | 46 |
Issue number | 12 |
Publication status | Published - Dec 2003 |
Externally published | Yes |
Link(s)
Abstract
The alignment of e-business academic programs with the e-business market is examined using a fit-gap analysis. Two high-end business schools, ranked independently by US News and Business Week, were chosen as sample. A total of 391 different e-commerce courses were identified, which were classified into 24 categories. Out of these, there are two broad and distinct tracks in e-business curricula, with one track paving the way for an e-business career with a prevailing focus on the business aspect and the other track leading to a career focusing on technology and Web-based systems development. Industry demand for e-business professionals and the skill sets required for the jobs was assessed by conducting a content analysis of e-business job listings on major US Web job sites. A fit-gap analysis was accomplished to identify industry needs that are being met by the e-business curricula and those industry demands that are not covered.
Research Area(s)
Bibliographic Note
Publication details (e.g. title, author(s), publication statuses and dates) are captured on an “AS IS” and “AS AVAILABLE” basis at the time of record harvesting from the data source. Suggestions for further amendments or supplementary information can be sent to [email protected].
Citation Format(s)
A fit-gap analysis of E-business curricula vs. industry needs. / Davis, Sid; Siau, Keng; Dhenuvakonda, Kumar.
In: Communications of the ACM, Vol. 46, No. 12, 12.2003, p. 167-177.
In: Communications of the ACM, Vol. 46, No. 12, 12.2003, p. 167-177.
Research output: Journal Publications and Reviews › RGC 21 - Publication in refereed journal › peer-review