Targeted Advisory case study

Skills Frameworks, Off the Shelf and Into HR Processes

8hours in the room, over 2 mornings
9HR processes ranked to choose where the frameworks go first
21job families, each with its own technical skills
5–10skills each person picks, refreshed every 6 months

The situation

The question behind the question.

This organisation had just written 2 frameworks: core and leadership competencies, and technical skills for each of its 21 job families, built by its learning team in 26 discussion groups with nearly 300 staff. Its new people strategy counted on them, and its HR system was about to support skills. Our job was to make that work reach the people it described. The HR leadership team already had a lot under way and did not want to run too fast; it had to decide where the frameworks would go first, and how.

As it was asked

“Help us embed our new frameworks across HR.”

As we reframed it

Decide where the frameworks change the most decisions, how they work in each process and what waits, starting from where we want to be in 3 years.

How we worked

How the work unfolded.

01

Start at the end

We started 3 years out. The leadership team said where it wanted to be by the end of 2027, then what had to be true to get there. Then a pre-mortem: imagine the strategy has failed; why? Unclear ownership, thin sponsorship and too few resources topped the risks, and they set the order: what was ready went first, what still lacked an owner or capacity waited.

02

Choose where first

Then the lifecycle: 9 HR processes, from workforce planning and recruiting to performance, development, moves and exits, ranked by the team. Recruiting and performance came first, developing leaders next; onboarding, reward and internal moves would wait. Each framework went first where it would change the most decisions, rather than everywhere at once.

03

Decide the mechanics

Then decisions, not principles. In appraisals: core and leadership competencies on a 2-point scale, simple enough that managers use it, rated by staff and manager, each naming the one competency with most room to grow, so the appraisal pointed to development. In job descriptions: core competencies for all from 2024, leadership ones for senior grades. Day 1 showed technical skills were the hard part, so we rebuilt Day 2 around them between the 2 mornings.

04

Map jobs, then people

Then 2 mappings, kept apart. Skills to jobs came first: technical skills in job descriptions from 2025, directors first, piloted before scaling, because ownership and capacity were not yet there. Skills to people came second, and here the team chose adoption over precision: staff pick 5 to 10 skills from their family’s list, without proficiency levels or validation, refreshed every 6 months, and are alerted to matching internal opportunities. A review at the end of 2024 would learn from the first months.

The instrument

Start at the end

The destination. Where do we want to be in 3 years, in words a manager would recognise?

The conditions. What has to be true by then: owners, sponsors, systems, capacity?

The pre-mortem. Imagine it failed. Why?

Plans written forwards inherit today’s habits. Written backwards, they start from the result and stop at what it takes.

What moved

What changed, and what didn't.

3HR processes now carry the frameworks: job descriptions, appraisals and staff skill profiles
Evidence Decision taken Adopted in practice Measured impact
What moved

The frameworks left the shelf. Competencies are now in job descriptions and appraisals, and technical skills in job descriptions and in staff skill profiles: 3 HR processes changed by 2 mornings of decisions, in the order the team chose, for 30 hours of our time.

What didn't move

Without proficiency levels or validation, the skills data cannot yet show gaps or support workforce planning. Workforce planning, reward and change management for staff were left for later, and the priorities rested on the votes of a small leadership team.

What we'd say to a peer

A new framework should not wait for a perfect roadmap. Start at the end, choose the few processes where it changes the most decisions, and decide the mechanics in the room. For skills, get people using the inventory before you make it precise.

Let's talk Read more cases
Method note:

Own approach in 4 steps; backcasting to 2027; pre-mortem; 9-process lifecycle ranking; skills-to-jobs and skills-to-people mapping; decision workshops on appraisal and recruitment.

WeAreHuman@Work

One piece of evidence on sustainable work, every Sunday. Free, and one click to leave.

Get the weekly edition