Skills gap analysis for teams
A gap analysis does not need a consultancy or a two-hundred-row framework. For a team, it is three questions asked of every skill the work needs: can anyone do it, can more than one person do it, and can anyone teach it?
What a skills gap analysis is
A skills gap analysis compares the skills the work needs with the skills the people have, and names the difference. At the scale of an organisation that can be a long project. At the scale of a team it fits in an afternoon, because the team already knows most of the answer — it has just never been written down in one place.
The written-down place is a skills matrix: people across the top, skills down the side, a level in each cell. Once it is filled in, the gaps are in the columns.
The three gaps that matter
Read one skill at a time, down its column, on a five-level scale (0 None to 4 Expert):
No cover
Nobody at Competent or above.
The work needs it and no one on the team does it alone. Either it is not being done, or it is being done badly, or someone outside the team is quietly doing it for you.
A single point of failure
Exactly one person at Proficient or above.
It works — until that person is on leave, busy, or gone. The most common gap, and the one teams are most surprised by, because nothing is visibly wrong.
No one to teach it
Nobody at Expert.
The team can do the work but cannot grow anyone into it. Every new person in that skill has to learn from outside, or from trial and error.
A fourth reading is the opposite of a gap: a skill someone wants to learn, in the same column as a colleague's Expert. That is a mentoring pair, and the cheapest way to close the next gap before it opens.
How to run one, step by step
- List the skills the work needs. Not the skills in a company framework — the ones this team's next six to twelve months will call on. Include the unglamorous ones: on-call, the legacy system, the supplier only one person talks to. Fifteen to twenty-five rows is enough.
- Map what the team has. Rate each person on each skill. Do it with the team rather than for it: self-ratings are systematically off, and colleagues who have seen the work correct them. A Market of Skills session does this in about an hour; a template works if you prefer a spreadsheet.
- Add the skills nobody has yet. Anything the plan needs that is not on the sheet gets a row of zeros. Anything people want to learn gets marked too — those are the gaps with a volunteer already attached.
- Read the columns. Mark each skill: no cover, single point of failure, no one to teach it, or fine. Most teams find two or three of each.
- Rank by risk, not by count. A single point of failure on the thing that pages you at night matters more than three missing nice-to-haves. Ask of each gap: what happens if we leave it for six months?
- Decide, per gap, what closes it. See below. Write the decision next to the row, with a name.
Four ways to close a gap
- Pair. Someone who wants to learn works alongside the person who has the skill. Fastest for single points of failure, and free — if the matrix shows you who wants to learn what.
- Train.A course, a book, a certification. Right when nobody on the team has the skill to pass on — the “no one to teach it” gap.
- Hire. Right when the gap is large, needed soon, and not something the team wants to grow into. The matrix tells you what the job description should actually say.
- Accept or rearrange. Some gaps are fine to carry, and some — a language, a shift pattern — close with a rota rather than with learning. Saying so out loud is a decision too.
The usual mistake is treating every gap as a training need. A gap analysis that ends in a list of courses has usually skipped the question of who on the team could teach it already.
Keep it current
A gap analysis is a snapshot. People learn, leave and change roles; the work changes. Redo it every quarter, alongside planning — a short session is enough when the matrix already exists.
In Kunska, the matrix is the analysis: the team fills it in together, Competency Insights compares skill levels across your teams with the weakest first and flags a matrix nobody has updated in a while, and the development plans turn the gaps into next steps for each person and for the team.
Frequently asked questions
- What is a skills gap analysis?
- A skills gap analysis compares the skills a team's work needs with the skills the team has, and names the difference. For a team it comes down to three questions per skill: is anyone able to do it, is more than one person able to do it, and is anyone good enough to teach it.
- How do you do a skills gap analysis for a team?
- List the skills the work needs over the next six to twelve months, rate each person on a five-level scale (ideally in a session with the team, so ratings are seen by colleagues), then read each skill's column: no one at Competent is a coverage gap, one person at Proficient or above is a single point of failure, and no one at Expert means nobody can teach it. Decide per gap whether to train, pair, hire, or accept it.
- What is the difference between a skills gap and a training need?
- A training need is one way to close a skills gap, not the only one. Some gaps close faster by pairing someone with a colleague who already has the skill, some by hiring, and some — a language, a certification — by rearranging a rota. Treating every gap as a training need is the most common way a gap analysis ends in a course nobody needed.
- How often should a team analyse its skills gaps?
- Once a quarter, alongside planning. Skills change, people move and the work changes; a gap analysis older than the current plan answers the previous quarter's questions.
- What template can I use for a skills gap analysis?
- A skills matrix is the template: people across the top, skills down the side, a level in each cell. Kunska has free Excel templates by role. Once it is filled in, the gaps are in the columns.
See your team's gaps
Create a team, run one Market of Skills session, and read the gaps straight off the matrix it builds. Free for teams.