The widening gap between higher education outcomes and labor market demands highlights the urgent need for effective university career and employability support. However, existing frameworks often fail to address systemic challenges such as resource constraints, service design inefficiencies, information asymmetry, low student engagement, and weak cross-sector collaboration. This study systematically analyzed thirty-one peer-reviewed journal articles using the PRISMA framework to identify these challenges and best practices. By conducting a systematic literature review (2020–2024), it develops the University Career and Employability Support Model (UCESM). This model integrates the Social Ecological Model (SEM) as a structural scaffold, supported by Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), and the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behavior (COM-B) framework as operational mechanisms. Findings reveal that career support must incorporate key elements such as career guidance, skill training, industry engagement, curriculum integration, psychological support, resource accessibility, and continuous evaluation. The UCESM framework organizes these strategies into four nested layers—External Driver, Organizational Hub, Interpersonal Support, and Individual Development—complemented by a Temporal Resilience Axis to enhance adaptability. A phased implementation approach prioritizes digital upskilling, industry collaboration, and policy alignment to build long-term employability resilience. The findings provide significant insights for policymakers and universities, advocating for an integrated and adaptable career support ecosystem. Future research should explore cultural adaptations in non-Western contexts and the potential of emerging technologies to enhance inclusivity. By offering a scalable, evidence-based model, UCESM redefines universities as proactive agents in fostering employability amid technological disruption and labor market shifts.
Xu et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: