Amy Kenworthy and George A. Hrivnak share their thoughts in this commentary, writing that they were both stimulated by and written in response to Riebe and Jackson's article "Assurance of Graduate Employability Skill Outcomes Through the Use of Rubrics." Having read two iterations of that article, they highlight three key messages that they believe warrant further consideration and discussion by the "Journal of Management Education" ("JME") readers. As part of this conversation starter, they question two interrelated assertions: (1) that a well-designed employability skills framework (ESF) is a tool that "applies equally" (Riebe & Jackson, 2014, p. 326) to business graduates at any classification level; and (2) that rubrics are tools that can be used to convey "precisely" (p. 337) what a student has learned. They view well-constructed frameworks and rubrics as useful tools to use, where applicable, as general guidelines for latter individualization and tailoring. Their perspective here, however, is that there is no teaching tool, framework, assessment mechanism, or other aspect of developing skills--employability and otherwise-- in the field that will apply equally across students, faculty members, and educational environments as well as result in assessment precision. Although there are numerous well-designed frameworks and rubrics in place (including both the ESF and the rubrics that Riebe and Jackson put forth in their article), when the overarching goal is to create student-centered, lifelong learning-oriented experiences, there is simply no "one size fits all" that will apply across all higher education contexts.