This content is made possible by our sponsors. Learn more about our OBJ360 content studio here.

Ottawa’s Upskilling Paradox: Canada’s Most Educated City Risks Falling Behind

Despite government funding and rising demand, many Canadian employers still consider corporate training a “cost” rather than a strategic investment.

Sponsored by Ottawa Education Group (OEG)

September 2, 2025

Seventy-five percent of Canadian companies report difficulty finding skilled workers, a challenge that rises to nearly 80 percent in Ottawa. The shortfall extends beyond technical expertise: employers also cite deficits in soft skills such as leadership, communication, teamwork, conflict resolution, and emotional intelligence.

For a city that promotes itself as Canada’s most educated population, and in particular a hub of knowledge and innovation, Ottawa can’t afford to ignore its widening skills gap.

Closing that gap requires more than new hires. How much are employers willing to invest in developing the talent they already have?

An Uneven Playing Field

Averaging $240 spent per employee every year, training investment by Canadian businesses lags far behind the $750 average among the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) representing 38 member countries.

By contrast, Canadian government and education sectors provide structured, long-term programs, often backed by public budgets and policy mandates. In 2024 alone, the Government of Canada made investments of nearly 1 billion in apprenticeship supports.

A Growing Market, Untapped Potential

Yet the market signals reveal a new direction. According to IMARC Group, Canada’s soft skills training market was valued at $671.43 million USD in 2024 and is projected to almost triple to 1.79 billion USD by 2033.

As organizations adopt disruptive technologies, they are learning that technical competencies alone do not drive performance. The ability to negotiate, manage teams, and build trust across virtual and in-person environments is now a competitive differentiator. In fact, 91% of Canadian employers say soft skills are valued just as highly as technical skills when hiring and promoting employees.

Ontario businesses also have access to grants and funding to offset training costs. Too often, these opportunities are overlooked. While funding has been depleted elsewhere in Ontario, Ottawa still has a significant pool remaining.

Why the Reluctance to Upskill in Ottawa?

Part of the answer lies in how employers view education in Ottawa. Degrees and credentials are valued at the hiring stage, but once talent is onboarded, the responsibility for ongoing development often shifts back to the individual. Workers who graduated years or even decades ago are left to “tinker” and “research” on their own time, expected to adapt to disruptive technologies and evolving workplace demands without structured support.

This expectation is especially visible in Ottawa, with more than half the population holding a post-secondary degree. Without meaningful investment in continuous learning, that advantage risks erosion.

Post-Pandemic Reset

The urgency is sharpened by the pandemic’s impact. Athabasca University’s Great Evolution study found that 74% of Canadian employees feel a pressing need to re-skill their interpersonal abilities after years of isolation. Nearly four out of five (77%) said they need to re-skill simply to keep up with their job’s changing demands.

Retention pressures add further risk. Employers who treat training as discretionary face the possibility of losing top talent to competitors that recognize upskilling as a strategic advantage. Those who do invest consistently report higher engagement, stronger profitability, and lower turnover.

Ottawa’s Urgency

Ottawa has the opportunity to move beyond the paradox and redefine upskilling not as an expense, but as the foundation of its competitiveness. The market is growing, funding exists, and the demand from employees is unmistakable.

The question for Ottawa employers is no longer whether they can afford to invest in upskilling, but whether they can afford the cost of “wait-and-see.”