Upskilling vs. Reskilling: Are We Solving the Wrong Problem?

LMSPortals
2 days ago
7 min read

“Skills are the new currency of the modern workforce.” It’s the kind of line you’ll hear in nearly every industry conference, HR blog, or executive memo today. The idea is simple: the faster technology changes, the faster people need to adapt. That means training.

Lots of it.

In response, companies have launched internal academies, learning platforms, and partnerships with online course providers. Governments have rolled out national reskilling initiatives. Even workers themselves, sensing the ground shift beneath them, are enrolling in bootcamps, buying certifications, and learning new software on weekends.

It feels like everyone is rowing in the same direction. But is the boat actually going where we need it to?

There’s a problem lurking beneath the enthusiasm: the way we talk about skills is often vague, and we tend to blur two very different approaches—upskilling and reskilling.

Both are vital. But applying them interchangeably may be doing more harm than good.

Learn About Our White Label Multi-Tenant SaaS LMS Partnership Program

What’s the Difference?

Upskilling means helping someone become more proficient in their current role or within their career path. It’s vertical growth. You’re going deeper, expanding your capabilities, becoming more competitive in the field you’re already in. A digital marketer learning SEO, or a product manager mastering agile methodology, is upskilling.

Reskilling, by contrast, is horizontal. It involves learning the skills needed for a different job altogether. This isn’t about sharpening what you already do—it’s about pivoting. A warehouse worker learning data entry, or a laid-off retail associate training in cybersecurity, is reskilling.

These are not minor distinctions. They reflect fundamentally different strategies, timelines, and outcomes. Yet in practice, organizations often blur the line, using "upskilling" as a catch-all term for any type of workforce training.

And that’s where the confusion begins.

What Problem Are We Actually Solving?

To choose the right solution, you first have to define the problem. And that’s where many organizations stumble.

If the core challenge is a performance gap—employees can’t keep up with new software, regulatory changes, or customer expectations—then upskilling is the right approach. It closes the gap between existing competencies and required expertise.

But if the issue is that entire roles are disappearing, morphing, or becoming obsolete—then no amount of upskilling will save the job. That’s a reskilling situation. You don’t train someone to be a better typewriter technician in the age of laptops. You train them for something else entirely.

The mistake many leaders make is assuming all skill gaps are alike. They treat reskilling problems like upskilling problems. That’s like trying to repair a foundation crack with a new coat of paint.

Technology Isn’t Waiting

Let’s be blunt: the pace of technological disruption is faster than most people—and companies—can comfortably handle.

Automation has already replaced millions of manufacturing, logistics, and clerical roles. AI is accelerating this trend by threatening not only blue-collar but also white-collar jobs: legal research, financial analysis, copywriting, and even code generation.

A 2023 report from McKinsey estimated that by 2030, 375 million workers globally may need to switch occupational categories due to automation. This isn’t a theoretical future—it’s a present reality unfolding job by job, sector by sector.

In these cases, upskilling may help workers perform better—for now. But eventually, the role they’re performing may not exist anymore. That’s when continuing to upskill becomes a kind of false security blanket.

Reskilling is what prepares people for what’s next. The challenge is that it’s harder, more expensive, and riskier—so we avoid it until there’s no choice left.

The Business Incentive Gap

Why do organizations gravitate toward upskilling even when reskilling is clearly needed?

The answer lies in incentives. Upskilling aligns neatly with business goals. It improves productivity, keeps teams competitive, and generates quick wins. If a sales team learns a new CRM system, the impact is measurable within a quarter.

Reskilling, however, is a long game. It requires retraining employees for roles that might not even exist within the current organization. That’s a tough sell to shareholders, CFOs, and even department heads.

If you're a company executive, reskilling an employee from cashier to cloud support engineer might make you feel good—but that worker is likely to leave for a better-paying tech job elsewhere. From a purely ROI-driven perspective, why invest?

This mismatch leads to a collective action problem: everyone knows reskilling is necessary for the broader economy, but no one wants to foot the bill.

The Human Cost

From the employee's perspective, the picture is just as complex.

Upskilling feels manageable. It’s about refining skills you already have, improving your current performance, and staying relevant. There’s continuity. You don’t have to let go of your identity as a nurse, mechanic, or project manager.

Reskilling, by contrast, means starting over. That’s not just a practical challenge—it’s a psychological one. You’re not just learning something new; you’re giving up something old. That’s scary. It brings feelings of failure, loss, and uncertainty.

Many people resist reskilling not because they can’t do it, but because they don’t want to admit they need to. They cling to the idea that their job will bounce back or evolve.

By the time reality sets in, opportunities may have passed.

There’s also a financial barrier. Even when affordable or subsidized training exists, people can’t afford the time away from work, the childcare costs, or the risk that a new career path won’t pay off. Without robust support systems, reskilling remains out of reach for those who need it most.

Education Is Still Stuck in the Past

One of the biggest obstacles to effective reskilling is the way we’ve built our education systems. Most are designed around young, full-time students preparing for first-time jobs. They’re not optimized for mid-career adults who need fast, focused, job-ready learning.

A traditional two- or four-year degree is often too slow and too expensive to be a practical reskilling solution. Bootcamps and certificate programs are growing, but many remain disconnected from real hiring pipelines or lack quality standards.

What’s needed is a reimagined model of education—modular, stackable, hybrid, and tightly aligned with actual market demand. Some companies are experimenting with this, offering "earn while you learn" models or direct job placement with training, but these are still rare.

Until learning is truly integrated with work, reskilling at scale will remain an uphill battle.

Inequality at the Core

The people who benefit most from upskilling are usually those who already have access to resources, networks, and stable employment. They’re tech-savvy, upwardly mobile, and in industries that value continuous learning.

The people who need reskilling the most—displaced workers, those in shrinking industries, those without college degrees—are often the least likely to receive it. They’re also more vulnerable to layoffs, economic shocks, and technological change.

If we keep over-indexing on upskilling, we widen the inequality gap. We create a future where certain workers evolve while others are left behind—not because they lacked potential, but because they lacked opportunity.

Reskilling is not just an economic issue. It’s a social justice issue.

How Do We Get It Right?

If we want to fix the mismatch between upskilling and reskilling, we need a systems-level reset. That means tackling the issue from multiple angles.

Workforce mapping: Companies and governments need to proactively map which roles are declining, which are evolving, and which are emerging. This should inform strategic workforce planning—not reactive decisions after layoffs happen.
Targeted training programs: Not all training is equal. We need programs tied directly to growing industries—healthcare, renewable energy, cybersecurity, AI operations, etc.—with clear pathways to employment.
Shared investment models: Public-private partnerships are key. Governments can de-risk investments by subsidizing training, while employers can contribute through apprenticeships, on-the-job training, and hiring commitments.
Support structures for learners: Adults need wraparound services—career coaching, mental health support, childcare, flexible learning options. Without these, reskilling programs struggle with retention and completion.
Clear messaging and culture shift: We must normalize career shifts. Changing jobs or industries should be seen as a sign of adaptability, not instability. Reskilling needs to be a badge of resilience, not desperation.

A Case for Precision

We don’t need to abandon upskilling or reskilling—we need to use each with surgical precision.

Upskilling is powerful when used in evolving industries: logistics managers learning data tools, nurses learning telehealth platforms, marketers mastering AI tools. It keeps teams competitive and sharp.

Reskilling is essential for sectors in decline: coal workers moving into solar energy, retail clerks moving into healthcare admin, taxi drivers training in IT support. It offers a lifeline when old paths end.

The real danger is misdiagnosing one as the other—and wasting precious time, money, and morale in the process.

The Time to Act Is Now

The next decade will redefine work in ways we can’t fully predict. But one thing is clear: standing still is not an option.

Organizations need to stop using "skills" as a buzzword and start engaging with it as a strategy. Leaders need to be honest about which roles have a future—and which don’t. And employees need to be given the tools, support, and clarity to choose the right path forward.

If we keep pretending every job can be saved through a quick course or a software update, we’re not preparing for the future—we’re just postponing the fallout.

Summary: Real Problems, Real Solutions

Upskilling is important. Reskilling is essential. But the biggest mistake we can make is confusing the two—and applying the wrong solution to the wrong problem.

The world doesn’t need more platitudes about lifelong learning. It needs practical, aligned, and courageous decisions about where people’s efforts—and hopes—should go.

Because the future of work isn’t about just doing more. It’s about doing what matters.

About LMS Portals

At LMS Portals, we provide our clients and partners with a mobile-responsive, SaaS-based, multi-tenant learning management system that allows you to launch a dedicated training environment (a portal) for each of your unique audiences.

The system includes built-in, SCORM-compliant rapid course development software that provides a drag and drop engine to enable most anyone to build engaging courses quickly and easily.

We also offer a complete library of ready-made courses, covering most every aspect of corporate training and employee development.

If you choose to, you can create Learning Paths to deliver courses in a logical progression and add structure to your training program. The system also supports Virtual Instructor-Led Training (VILT) and provides tools for social learning.

Together, these features make LMS Portals the ideal SaaS-based eLearning platform for our clients and our Reseller partners.