Policymakers, researchers and higher education stakeholders gathered in Brussels to discuss how EHESO data can inform policy, strengthen institutions and support Europe's transition towards a more skilled and innovative future.

On 12 November 2025, the European Higher Education Sector Observatory (EHESO) held a policy-oriented conference titled "From data to direction: How can EHESO support the monitoring of the Union of Skills?" at the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) in Brussels. The hybrid event brought together 19 speakers and 32 on-site participants, with a further 88 joining online to explore how the Observatory's growing data infrastructure can translate into meaningful policy guidance. The conference's programme, the slide of presentations made, as well as a summary report can be found on the second EHESO conference's webpage.

Setting the scene: "from data to direction" - EHESO's evolution

Opening speakers reflected on EHESO's transformation from a data collection platform into a true observatory translating complex information into actionable insights. Florence Mondin (EACEA) described how the vision of a single European platform bringing together different data strands is rapidly becoming reality. She highlighted concrete progress: scoreboard indicators have been expanded and updated, data gaps identified and filled, and the new Benchmarking Tool represents an exciting step forward offering institutions the opportunity to learn, adapt and grow stronger. With the Eurograduate survey’s integration paving the way for understanding graduate mobility across Europe, Mondin emphasised that EHESO is not just about data but about enabling smarter decisions and fostering higher education across Europe. "Collaboration is our greatest strength," she concluded, noting that the Union of Skills cannot be built by data alone.

Susanne Conze (European Commission) reinforced why EHESO matters by posing fundamental questions: Do we know why people choose STEM? Do we know how many universities offer particular programmes? Do we have the data needed to promote effective policies? Looking at the ambition of the Union of Skills, she argued, makes clear that EHESO is essential - if it did not already exist, we would need to create it. Conze outlined two years of intensive work, including new rounds of institutional surveys combining ETER and EHESO data, analysis of what European University Alliances add to the sector, and the important step forward of integrating Eurograduate. With new tools becoming available gradually and plans to strengthen the regional dimension in data analysis to support competitiveness, she echoed Mondin's closing sentiment: collaboration is our greatest tool and we need all stakeholders on board.

Benedetto Lepori (EHESO Scientific Director) offered a candid reflection on what makes EHESO both successful and challenging. The Observatory's scale is substantial: 40 countries, 600 regions, 3 500 institutions and data spanning more than 10 scientific fields. This creates multiple layers of complexity. Multilevel heterogeneity enables analysis combining country, regional and institutional perspectives, yet current tools remain largely single-layered. Time series stretching back to 2011 allow exploration of policy impacts, but different sources follow different collection schedules which can be challenging. Similarly, diversity of data sources creates a unique integrated resource, yet it makes processing and verification increasingly demanding. The varied user needs, from policymakers seeking dashboards to researchers requiring microdata, also means that no single format serves everyone. Looking ahead to 2026, Lepori identified Eurograduate integration as the critical priority.

Entrepreneurship and innovation in higher education

The first thematic session examined how universities contribute to innovation ecosystems. Inga Popovaitė (PPMI) presented EHESO data exploring multiple dimensions: EU Framework Programme cooperation with industry, joint publications, internship prevalence, Erasmus+ traineeships, and graduate outcomes including self-employment and education-job match. The analysis revealed that different countries excel in different areas: Cyprus leads in EU-FP cooperation, Finland in company-HEI collaboration, Liechtenstein in joint publications, and Estonia with nearly 15% of graduates founding companies.

Crucially, correlation analysis demonstrated these dimensions are interconnected: countries with more EU-FP cooperation have higher internship rates, which in turn correlate with better job matches. Member institutions of European University Alliances emerged as more engaged in industry collaborations and Erasmus+ doctoral traineeships, which means that the alliances can be seen as concentrating and catalysing high-intensity research and innovation.

Peter Joore (NHL Stenden University of Applied Sciences) argued that organisations need clear strategic direction before generating meaningful data, describing how his institution created a mutual relationship between data and direction using HEInnovate. Bart Derre (HO-GENT University of Applied Sciences and Arts) shared his institution's paradigm shift from student entrepreneurship to broad entrepreneurial education, emphasising the need for safe spaces for productive failure, structural alignment, and leadership that models entrepreneurial behaviour.

Fostering STEM and addressing the gender gap

The second session addressed Europe's persistent STEM challenges. Omar Abozeid (PPMI) presented analysis classifying institutions into three groups: limited STEM orientation (below 16% of students), moderate (16-57%), and high (above 57%). The findings revealed that most European institutions fall into the limited category, while European University Alliances tend towards institutions with more balanced portfolios.

High STEM institutions demonstrated substantially greater resource intensity and internationalisation, raising questions about whether European STEM education relies on imported talent rather than developing domestic capacity. A troubling inverse relationship emerged between STEM orientation and women's participation, with concurrent underrepresentation among both students, PhD candidates and staff suggesting mutually reinforcing dynamics across the whole higher education trajectory.

Hanne Shapiro (University of Bristol) challenged conventional thinking, arguing that STEM is not a single labour market but encompasses major variations across sectors. Hybrid roles have become the norm, and skills obsolescence is accelerating, requiring granular, real-time intelligence rather than the more established broad categories.

Duru Bayram (Eindhoven University of Technology) examined factors shaping women's participation through the "leaky pipeline" concept. Interest begins in primary school, but women leave at every subsequent stage due to individual factors like self-efficacy, contextual influences from family and cultural norms, and institutional barriers in curricula and teaching practices. She identified significant policy gaps: limited family-support policies and insufficient targeted initiatives at institutional and national levels. Here teacher development programmes are essential but require systemic integration into the wider context. 

Understanding graduate outcomes

The third session explored graduate tracking data. Frans Kaiser (University of Twente) explained that a user group has been established to learn from diverse stakeholder experiences. While many countries have national systems, Eurograduate provides crucial European-level comparability, and integrating national, European and international systems is essential for a comprehensive understanding of the sector across the EU.

Arnaud Dupray (Céreq) detailed the French dual system combining administrative data from InserSup with the Génération survey. Administrative data enables comprehensive coverage and detailed geographical breakdowns but lacks information on self-employment and employment abroad. The survey provides rich pathway information and medium-term follow-up over 20 years but with limited sample size. His analysis revealed that 28% of graduates gain international experience, with border proximity significantly influencing employment abroad: Mulhouse graduates work mainly in Switzerland, while Lorraine graduates predominantly find positions in Luxembourg.

Katarina Weßling (Maastricht University) demonstrated that social background continues shaping outcomes after graduation. Parental education does not significantly influence un-employment rates but substantially affects income, overeducation likelihood and occupational position. Young people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds find jobs at similar rates but earn less and face greater insecurity. Her findings emphasised that measures supporting mobility, including study abroad, simultaneously help reduce social inequality. 

Breakout discussions

Three parallel sessions explored these specific topics. The EHESO-HEInnovate discussion highlighted their complementary roles: EHESO provides comparative data for monitoring while HEInnovate enables institutional self-reflection. Participants identified gaps in validated instruments for measuring entrepreneurial learning outcomes and called for more granular data at institutional, programme and individual levels. Gender dimensions revealed that female entrepreneurs raise substantially less funding than males even with comparable ideas.

The STEM and European University Alliances session noted that technology-focused alliances have higher capacity for linking innovation ecosystems, though alliances vary widely and are not expected to contribute equally to STEM objectives. International talent attraction remains critical, yet some countries are rolling back third-country enrolment due to financial constraints. Participants emphasised the need for qualitative research to understand why some women graduate from STEM but subsequently leave STEM careers and called for greater involvement of labour market stakeholders in policy discussions.

The graduate tracking session identified additional stakeholders who could benefit from the data, including labour market agencies, regional authorities and quality assurance bodies, while emphasising the need to balance broad user group membership with a clear identity and also to address terminology challenges, as "graduate tracking" is not universally understood across national contexts.

How EHESO contributes to the Union of Skills

The concluding panel considered how EHESO can best support the Union of Skills. Julie Fionda (DG EMPL) expressed interest in EHESO's contribution to skills intelligence, particularly understanding vertical mismatches between education levels and labour market needs, horizontal mismatches between fields and employment sectors, and return on investment data across Europe's heterogeneous labour market.

Johan Blaus (CESAER) called for patience in developing data systems and stressed supporting universities as lifelong learning hubs, noting that employers and students increasingly value soft skills and stakeholders must collaborate to design programmes developing these.

Student representative Katrijn Vandenborne (BEST) made the case for interdisciplinary skills and project-based learning, arguing that systemic change is needed inside universities to ensure every graduate develops critical thinking structurally. She emphasised investing in teacher education and normalising failure as part of the learning process.

Nils Elofsson (Business Europe) confirmed employers highly value the combination of technical expertise with soft skills, suggesting apprenticeships could help develop these competencies while strengthening university-industry connections.

Key takeaways and next steps

The conference reinforced that EHESO serves diverse user communities with fundamentally different needs. Looking forward, the Observatory must continue expanding data coverage while strengthening regional dimensions and making insights accessible through thematic reports and the developing Student Hub.

Successful Union of Skills implementation requires collaboration at every level: amongst institutions, across national systems, and between universities and industry partners. EHESO is positioned to provide an evidence base for smarter policy decisions across Europe's diverse higher education landscape and boost collaboration between the different parts of the sector.