Graduate education in conservation biology has been assailed as ineffective and inadequate to train the professionals needed to solve conservation problems. To identify how graduate education might better fit the needs of the conservation workplace, we surveyed practitioners and academics about the importance of particular skills on the job and the perceived importance of teaching those same skills in graduate school. All survey participants (n = 189) were alumni from the University of California Davis Graduate Group in Ecology and received thesis-based degrees from 1973 to 2008. Academic and practitioner respondents clearly differed in workplace skills, although there was considerably more agreement in training recommendations. On the basis of participant responses, skill sets particularly at risk of underemphasis in graduate programs are decision making and implementation of policy, whereas research skills may be overemphasized. Practitioners in different job positions, however, require a variety of skill sets, and we suggest that ever-increasing calls to broaden training to fit this multitude of jobs will lead to a trade-off in the teaching of other skills. Some skills, such as program management, may be best developed in on-the-job training or collaborative projects. We argue that the problem of graduate education in conservation will not be solved by restructuring academia alone. Conservation employers need to communicate their specific needs to educators, universities need to be more flexible with their opportunities, and students need to be better consumers of the skills offered by universities and other institutions.