As 2025 drew to a close, the nation lost two leaders whose careers spanned very different worlds—but whose legacies converged around a shared conviction.
Jim Hunt, who served two stints as governor of North Carolina from 1977–1985 and again from 1993–2001, was one of the most influential education governors of the modern era. Lou Gerstner, the former chairman and CEO of IBM, is widely credited with orchestrating one of the most significant corporate turnarounds of the 1990s.
Amid their many accomplishments, Hunt and Gerstner shared a deep, unwavering belief that education is the linchpin of economic opportunity for individuals and of long-term competitiveness for the nation as a whole. Their passing is a moment not only for reflection, but for reckoning—because the conditions that brought them together nearly three decades ago are strikingly similar to those we face today.
In the mid-1990s, Hunt and Gerstner were prominent voices among a group of visionary governors and CEOs who chose collaboration over complacency. They worked across state and party lines to set a collective agenda for educational improvement tied directly to a vision of economic competitiveness. That effort culminated in the 1996 National Education Summit, which convened more than 40 governors and CEOs from some of the world’s most influential companies.
The summit marked a pivotal moment. Business and policy leaders—Democrats and Republicans alike—came together with a shared sense of urgency and responsibility. They understood that America’s economic future depended on the strength of its education system and the skills of its workforce, and they were unwilling to wait for Washington to solve the problem.
Looking back on that moment, there are striking similarities to this one.
Like today, the mid-1990s were marked by uncertainty and disruption. Leaders faced questions about global competition, economic security, and whether the United States was preparing enough people for the jobs of the future. Resources were constrained. Trust across political lines was thin. And yet there was broad agreement on one essential truth: education and the economy were inseparable.
There was also a shared recognition that while the challenges were national, the solutions didn’t need to come from the federal government. Instead, Governors and CEOs decided to take up the mantle themselves. They believed states were best positioned to act—and that business had a responsibility to help shape the conditions under which talent and innovation could flourish.
Concerns about international competitiveness loomed large. Leaders worried the U.S. was falling behind other countries in preparing workers with the skills needed to drive growth in critical industries. Their call to action—build a world-class education system aligned to economic needs—would resonate powerfully today.
Gerstner, Hunt, and their peers understood that without a highly skilled, well-prepared workforce, the United States could not achieve the competitiveness it sought. They recognized the direct link between economic development and talent development, and that bridging the two required intentional policy and sustained collaboration.
The agenda they forged was ambitious: higher expectations for students, stronger systems to measure performance, and real accountability for results. They believed the country simply wasn’t aiming high enough in its schools to produce the talent that the future demanded.
Importantly, they created a unique table. A bipartisan group of governors sat shoulder to shoulder with CEOs of global companies. Together, they benchmarked U.S. expectations against international peers and allowed states to measure themselves against one another. The result was what could be described as “competitive collaboration”—a dynamic that pushed states to raise standards, build better data systems, and inspire excellence without federal mandates.
And it worked. In the years that followed, all states set higher academic standards, scores on the Nation’s Report Card rose, and students from all walks of life began to receive better preparation for career success.
It took visionary leadership, political courage, and a genuine spirit of partnership between education and business—and across party lines.
Those ingredients are desperately needed again. While there is widespread recognition today that education must be more closely connected to workforce and economic agendas, the mechanisms to realize that vision are weak. Collaboration across state lines exists, but not at anything close to the scale or intensity of the 1990s. The bipartisan spirit that allowed leaders to develop shared solutions while maintaining their own state priorities is largely absent.
And yet the need has only grown.
We are heading into a year in which gubernatorial races will be held in 36 states. A significant number of new governors could take office. What would it look like if they aspired to be education governors in the mold of Jim Hunt? Or of Tommy Thompson, John Engler, and Roy Romer—leaders from both parties who worked across state lines to advance a shared education agenda? What would it look like for more CEOs to embrace a commitment to improving our education system not just as corporate social responsibility, but as an investment in their companies’ growth and the prosperity of our nation?
There are signs of possibility. The current and immediately previous chairs of the National Governors Association, Governor Stitt of Oklahoma and Governor Polis of Colorado, have both focused their initiatives on education. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon recently committed significant resources through the firm’s “security and resiliency initiative,” which aims to dramatically accelerate innovation in areas critical to U.S. competitiveness. That spirit echoes the mindset of business leaders in the 1990s—including the CEOs of Procter & Gamble, Boeing, Intel, Prudential, State Farm, and others—who understood that competitiveness required long-term investment—and that those investments were most effective when made in partnership with states.
The challenges we face today are not confined to any single state or company. As AI reshapes every industry from medicine to manufacturing, business leaders of all stripes are wrestling with how best to meet this moment and ensure that they have prepared talent.
Governors, too, are grappling with common questions: How do we ensure students build strong foundational skills in their K–12 experiences? How do we improve ROI in higher education and strengthen these systems as engines of innovation, research, and talent production? How do we govern more efficiently, align fragmented systems, and reduce bureaucracy? And how do we ensure the workforce can meet the shifting skill demands as a result of AI?
The challenges before us are national in scope, as they were when Lou Gerstner and Jim Hunt joined fellow governors and CEOs to confront the forces reshaping the economy. What mattered then—and what matters now—was not uniformity of approach, but a shared seriousness of purpose and a willingness to take responsibility for outcomes.
Today’s governors and business leaders face a similar moment of choice. Will they treat education as peripheral, or as foundational to growth, security and competitiveness? Will they invest, innovate, and govern with the long view in mind?
The answer to those questions will shape not only our education systems, but the nation’s economic future.
Editor’s note: This was first published by Forbes.
