Oral Communication Skills: Are the Priorities of the Workplace and AACSB-Accredited Business Programs Aligned?
Abstract
Our purpose in this study was to assess the alignment of oral communication (OC) skills between the workplace and business schools. Drawing on theory related to communication interactivity, we differentiate three types of OC: presenting, listening, and conversing. In reviewing prior empirical research, we found that listening was the most important of these OC types in the workplace, followed by conversing and presenting, respectively. We review and analyze learning goals of U.S. undergraduate business programs accredited by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business. We found that 76% of the business programs had an oral presentation learning goal, 22%, a conversing goal, and 11%, a listening goal. Our research reveals a misalignment between the OC skills needed in the workplace compared to those emphasized in business curricula. We discuss potential reasons for the misalignment and offer suggestions for closing the gap.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Oral assessments offer advantages in higher education, particularly ability to assess deep understanding and critical thinking while developing workplace-relevant communication skills.
“Oral assessments offer several significant advantages in higher education, particularly in their ability to assess students' deep understanding and critical thinking capabilities while simultaneously developing workplace-relevant communication skills that employers value (Brink & Costigan, 2015;Thomas et al., 2014).”
From Replacing Traditional Written Laboratory Reports with Interactive Oral Assessments: Enhancing Laboratory Skill Assessment in Undergraduate Genetics Education (2026) · cites this paper as Brink & Costigan, 2015
Cites
Content Analysis in Mass Communication: Assessment and Reporting of Intercoder Reliability
Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00826.x · Cited by 3,068 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Della Vedova, C. B., Birbeck, D., & Davey, S. K. (2026) · Research in Science Education · doi:10.1007/s11165-026-10380-3
- Authors
- Brink, K. E., & Costigan, R. D.
- Affiliations
- Western Michigan University (US)
- St. John Fisher University (US)
- Venue
- Academy of Management Learning & Education
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2015-06
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 205-221
- ISSN
- 1537-260X (ISSN-L)
- 1944-9585
- OpenAlex
- W2160567378
- Cited by
- 110
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 8.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Academy of Management Learning and Education (publishedVersion)
- Fisher Digital Publications (St. John Fisher College) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Management and Marketing Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education and Employability
- Social Sciences › Communication › Language, Communication, and Linguistic Studies
- Keywords
- speaking skills, business education, AACSB accreditation, business school curriculum, workplace communication, listening skills, learning objectives, undergraduate business programs, curriculum alignment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
