Competency Mapping and Talent Development Training Course

Participants can derive capability implications from business strategy and operating model changes.

• Strategy-on-a-page analysis identifies changing capabilities, constraints and performance demands
• Operating model components linked to role accountabilities and decision rights
• Scenario planning tests workforce implications under alternative strategic assumptions
• Critical role criteria based on value creation, scarcity and risk exposure
• Build-versus-buy analysis compares development, recruitment, contracting and redeployment options
• Capability heat maps prioritise gaps by business impact and urgency

Participants can organise roles into coherent job families, levels and career paths.

• Job family definitions group work with shared purpose and expertise
• Career streams distinguish professional, managerial, technical and project pathways
• Role level descriptors differentiate scope, autonomy, complexity and influence
• Accountability mapping separates role outputs, decisions, interfaces and controls
• RACI analysis clarifies overlapping responsibilities within redesigned operating structures
• Role profile templates connect purpose, accountabilities, competencies and measures

Participants can gather credible role evidence using structured job analysis methods.

• Critical incident technique captures behaviours associated with success and failure
• Behavioural event interview questions elicit context, actions and outcomes
• Document analysis reviews procedures, scorecards, audits and role descriptions
• Structured observation records task conditions, decisions and interaction patterns
• Focus group protocols surface shared expertise and disputed role expectations
• Evidence triangulation compares manager, jobholder, customer and performance data

Participants can construct a competency model with clear categories and practical scope.

• Core competencies express organisation-wide behaviours linked to purpose and values
• Leadership competencies reflect strategic direction, people leadership and governance
• Functional competencies define discipline-specific knowledge, methods and professional judgement
• Technical competencies specify tools, systems, standards and specialised procedures
• Competency dictionaries structured through definitions, indicators and proficiency levels
• Model scope decisions prevent excessive detail and duplicate competency statements

Participants can write observable, differentiated behavioural indicators for role assessment.

• Behavioural indicators use observable actions, conditions and relevant work outputs
• Action-result phrasing avoids personality labels and unverifiable trait language
• Proficiency scales distinguish foundational, skilled, advanced and expert performance
• Progression logic increases complexity, judgement, autonomy and organisational impact
• Negative indicators identify common risks without creating punitive competency models
• Indicator quality checks test specificity, observability, relevance and distinctiveness

Participants can map specialist expertise requirements for a defined function or role family.

• Functional decomposition identifies major services, processes, controls and expertise areas
• Subject matter expert panels define critical knowledge and technical judgement
• SFIA skills descriptions adapted to local roles and capability requirements
• Technical standards mapped to required certification, compliance and assurance obligations
• Skills matrices show required proficiency by role, level and work assignment
• Currency criteria identify when technical competence requires reassessment or renewal

Participants can identify and prioritise future capability requirements using structured evidence.

• Environmental scanning identifies regulatory, technology, customer and labour-market signals
• Future-back planning defines capabilities required under a target operating model
• O*NET occupational data compared with internal role and skills evidence
• Automation exposure analysis separates replaceable tasks from augmented professional judgement
• Adjacent skills analysis identifies plausible reskilling routes between role families
• Prioritisation matrix ranks emerging capabilities by impact, feasibility and time horizon

Participants can validate competency models and establish controls for their ongoing use.

• Content validation tests whether competencies represent essential role requirements
• Stakeholder review sessions resolve terminology, scope and proficiency disagreements
• Adverse impact checks examine potential barriers for protected employee groups
• Version control records approved changes, rationale, owners and review dates
• Governance forums assign decision rights for framework changes and exceptions
• Annual refresh cycles incorporate strategy shifts, workforce data and user feedback

Participants can design proportionate assessment methods for competency-based talent decisions.

• Assessment purpose determines evidence standards for development, selection or succession
• Multi-source assessment combines self-ratings, manager evidence and peer feedback
• Behaviourally anchored rating scales reduce ambiguity in manager judgements
• Work samples test technical competence through realistic role outputs
• Assessment centre methods combine simulations, observation guides and assessor calibration
• Evidence matrices link each competency to valid sources and rating criteria

Participants can align competency evidence with performance discussions and talent calibration.

• Performance objectives distinguish results achieved from behaviours demonstrated
• Nine-box grid separates performance evidence from future potential indicators
• Calibration meetings test rating consistency using comparable evidence and standards
• Manager bias patterns include recency, halo, similarity and central tendency
• Rating distribution analysis flags inconsistent standards across teams and functions
• Feedback conversations connect observed behaviour, impact and agreed development actions

Participants can diagnose capability gaps and segment talent for appropriate action.

• Gap analysis compares required proficiency with evidenced current capability
• Skills inventory data aggregated by role, location, grade and business unit
• Talent segmentation differentiates critical experts, emerging talent and deployment risks
• Risk matrices combine capability scarcity, business dependency and succession exposure
• Data quality checks identify missing ratings, inflated scores and inconsistent definitions
• Dashboard measures track gap closure, internal mobility and readiness movement

Participants can design development pathways that address verified competency gaps.

• 70-20-10 model allocates learning through experience, relationships and formal study
• Development pathways sequence foundational, applied and advanced capability-building experiences
• Learning needs analysis distinguishes knowledge gaps from practice and confidence gaps
• Stretch assignments target specific competencies with manageable delivery risk
• Coaching and mentoring matched to development goals and proficiency needs
• Kirkpatrick evaluation links development interventions to behaviour and performance evidence

Participants can create competency-based development plans and career movement criteria.

• Individual development plans specify target competency, evidence and review milestones
• SMART development objectives define observable progress within agreed timeframes
• Career pathways show lateral, vertical and specialist movement options
• Readiness criteria combine capability evidence, experience breadth and performance record
• Talent marketplace principles match employee skills with short-term business assignments
• Manager development conversations balance employee aspiration with workforce requirements

Participants can use competency evidence to strengthen succession planning for critical roles.

• Succession slates identify potential successors against role-specific competency requirements
• Ready-now and ready-later categories supported by defined evidence thresholds
• Bench strength analysis measures qualified successor coverage for critical positions
• Development assignments close priority gaps within succession candidate pools
• Emergency succession protocols address unexpected vacancy and continuity risks
• Succession review governance protects confidentiality, fairness and decision accountability

Participants can plan adoption, measurement and governance for a competency mapping programme.

• Implementation roadmap sequences design, piloting, communication, training and scale-up activities
• Pilot evaluation tests usability, rating consistency and manager acceptance
• Change impact assessment identifies affected processes, systems and stakeholder groups
• Manager enablement plans cover briefing materials, guides and calibration support
• ISO 30414 metrics selected for workforce capability and development reporting
• Benefits realisation measures connect competency adoption with talent outcomes

Participants can build, review and present a complete competency mapping and talent development proposal for a selected business need.

• Business case defines capability challenge, target population and expected outcomes
• Role family map establishes boundaries, levels and critical accountabilities
• Competency model presents definitions, behavioural indicators and proficiency scales
• Assessment plan specifies evidence sources, rating rules and calibration controls
• Gap analysis prioritises development needs, talent risks and workforce actions
• Development pathway assigns experiences, learning interventions and manager responsibilities
• Implementation proposal presents governance, milestones, measures and change actions
• Peer review tests clarity, feasibility, fairness and strategic alignment