A Competency-Driven Framework for Business Education Curriculum Design

Thesis Abstract

The rapid evolution of global business environments and the increasing demand for graduates with demonstrable competencies necessitate a reorientation of business education curriculum design toward clearly articulated outcomes and transferable skills. This study addresses the gap between traditional knowledge-focused curricula and the contemporary needs of employers who seek graduates with measurable competencies in critical thinking,communication, digital literacy, collaboration, and ethical decision-making. The aim is to develop and validate a competency-driven framework that guides curriculum design, delivery, and assessment in business education. Specific objectives are (1) to identify core competencies demanded by industry stakeholders across finance, marketing, management, and entrepreneurship; (2) to examine the alignment between existing curricula and these competencies; (3) to develop a theory-driven framework that operationalizes competency outcomes into course design, teaching strategies, and assessment rubrics; (4) to pilot and refine the framework in a mid-sized university business school; and (5) to evaluate the framework’s impact on student learning outcomes and stakeholder satisfaction. The study adopts a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design. In the qualitative phase, 40 semi-structured interviews and 12 focus groups with employers, alumni, faculty, and industry partners are analyzed thematically to identify emergent competency domains and sub-skills, using Gioia methodology and thematic analysis. These findings inform the development of a competency taxonomy and a paradigmatic framework grounded in the Theories of Constructive Alignment (Biggs) and Competency-Based Education (Hager & Gonczi). In the quantitative phase, a survey instrument measuring 48 competency indicators is administered to 520 undergraduate and postgraduate business students across three faculties at a national university. Validity and reliability are established through content validity by expert panels and Cronbach’s alpha analyses (? ? 0.82). To test the framework’s validity and predictive power, multiple regression analyses and structural equation modeling (SEM) are conducted to examine the relationships between curriculum design features (learning outcomes, assessment alignment, instructional strategies) and competency attainment, with demographic controls. A pilot implementation involving three pilot courses is evaluated via a quasi-experimental design with matched control cohorts to assess differences in competency outcomes and graduate employability indicators over a two-semester timeline. Data collection instruments include curriculum mapping matrices, employer advisory board surveys, student competency self-assessments, performance-based assessment rubrics, and course-embedded assessments (e.g., capstone projects, simulations, and case-based exams). Reliability and validity are further ensured through triangulation across documents, observations, and student performance data. Expected findings indicate that a clearly articulated competency-driven framework improves alignment between intended outcomes and assessment, enhances demonstration of transferable skills, and elevates employer-perceived readiness. It is anticipated that constructs such as cognitive complexity, digital fluency, teamwork, ethical reasoning, and adaptive problem-solving will emerge as central competency domains with robust positive correlations to course design features and performance-based assessments. Regression and SEM results are expected to demonstrate that explicit alignment of learning outcomes with authentic assessments and industry-relevant simulations significantly predicts competency attainment (p < 0.05). The pilot courses are expected to yield statistically significant improvements in capstone performance scores, employability indices, and student confidence in applying knowledge to real-world problems compared with control groups. The study contributes to knowledge by offering a rigorously developed, theory-informed framework that translates competency standards into concrete curriculum design, teaching methods, and assessment practices for business education. It advances the literature on constructive alignment and competency-based education by integrating industry-driven competency taxonomies with measurable outcomes, validated through empirical data from multiple stakeholder groups. Practically, the framework provides a replicable blueprint for curriculum developers, program directors, and accreditation bodies to design, implement, and evaluate curricula that demonstrably cultivate employability-ready competencies. The main conclusion anticipates that adopting a competency-driven framework will yield higher-quality learning experiences, stronger alignment across curriculum components, and improved graduate outcomes. Recommendations include adopting industry advisory boards as ongoing collaborators, integrating authentic assessment ecosystems across modules, investing in faculty development for competency-based pedagogy, and scaling the framework through longitudinal studies to capture long-term impacts on career progression and adaptability to shifting labor market demands.