Purpose
Translate a function's business priorities into the specific capabilities each role must hold, surface where current capability falls short, and rank those gaps by business impact — so L&D and talent leaders know exactly which gaps to close, in what order, and whether to build, buy, or borrow the capability.
When to Use
Invoke this skill when the user asks to:
- Run a capability or skills gap analysis for a team, function, or business unit
- Diagnose why a team is struggling to deliver against its strategy or targets
- Plan workforce capability ahead of a reorg, growth phase, or new operating model
- Build a development roadmap or learning plan for a specific function
- Justify a hiring, training, or contractor investment with a capability rationale
- Prepare for a quarterly or annual talent review with capability data
Inputs Required
Before starting, collect:
- Function or BU: The team being analyzed (e.g., "B2B Sales," "Data & Analytics," "Customer Success")
- Business priorities: 2–5 priorities or outcomes this function must deliver in the next 6–18 months
- Roles in scope: The specific roles or levels being assessed (e.g., "AE, Sales Manager, SDR")
- Current capability picture: What the team can do well today, known weak spots, recent performance signals
- Headcount and tenure mix: Rough team size and balance of senior vs. junior/new
- Constraints: Budget, hiring freeze, timeline, or build-vs-buy preferences
- Available development levers: Existing training, mentoring, internal mobility, or vendor options
If the current capability picture is thin, infer likely gaps from the business priorities and flag them as assumptions to validate with managers.
Instructions
Step 1: Derive Required Capabilities from Priorities
For each business priority, work backward to the capabilities required to deliver it.
- For every priority, name 3–6 capabilities the function must hold to deliver it — split into technical/functional (e.g., "consultative discovery," "SQL data modeling") and behavioral/enabling (e.g., "stakeholder influence," "prioritization under ambiguity").
- Assign each capability to the role(s) that own it — not every capability sits at every level.
- Set a required proficiency level per role using a 4-point scale: 1 = Aware, 2 = Practicing, 3 = Proficient, 4 = Expert/Coaches others.
- Avoid generic competency-library filler. Each capability must trace directly to a stated priority.
Step 2: Assess Current Proficiency
For each role × capability, estimate current proficiency on the same 1–4 scale.
- Use the current capability picture, performance signals, and tenure mix as evidence.
- Where evidence is missing, mark the estimate as (assumed) and note what data would confirm it.
- Account for distribution, not just average: flag capabilities where a few experts mask a thin bench ("key-person risk").
Step 3: Build the Capability Gap Matrix
Construct a matrix of Role × Capability showing Required, Current, and Gap (Required − Current).
- A gap of 0 = met; 1 = developmental; 2+ = critical.
- Note any capability that is over-built (current exceeds required) — these are coaching or redeployment assets.
Step 4: Rank Gaps by Business Impact
Score each gap on two axes to produce a severity rank:
- Impact: How directly does this gap threaten a business priority? (High / Medium / Low)
- Breadth: How many people or how much of the function it affects, including key-person risk.
- Combine into a priority order: High-impact + broad gaps rank first; isolated low-impact gaps rank last. Produce a single ranked list of the top gaps, not a tie.
Step 5: Recommend Build / Buy / Borrow per Top Gap
For each top-ranked gap, recommend a closure path with reasoning:
- Build (train/develop): Best for gaps that are 1-level, broadly held, and where internal talent has the foundation. Specify the lever (workshop, coaching, stretch assignment, peer learning).
- Buy (hire): Best for critical 2+ gaps with no internal foundation and a hard timeline. Specify the role/level to hire.
- Borrow (contract/second/partner): Best for urgent, specialized, or temporary needs. Specify the arrangement.
- State the trade-off and rough time-to-impact (weeks vs. months vs. quarters) for the chosen path.
Step 6: 90-Day Closure Plan
Sequence the highest-priority gaps into a phased plan:
- Days 0–30: Validate assumed proficiencies with managers; launch quick wins (peer learning, coaching) and initiate any hiring/contracting.
- Days 31–60: Run primary development interventions; onboard hires/contractors.
- Days 61–90: Reassess proficiency on closed gaps; report movement against the matrix.
- For each phase, name owners (L&D, hiring manager, function lead) and a measurable checkpoint.
Output Format
- Structure: Six sections following the steps; the gap matrix presented as a table
- Length: 1,000–1,400 words plus the matrix table
- Format: Structured document with one Markdown table (the gap matrix) and ranked/numbered lists elsewhere
- Sections: Required Capabilities (by priority) → Capability Gap Matrix → Severity-Ranked Gaps → Build/Buy/Borrow Recommendations → 90-Day Closure Plan → Assumptions to Validate
- Tone: Talent strategy advisor — diagnostic, evidence-led, and decisive about priorities; comfortable making a recommendation rather than listing options
Quality Checklist
Before delivering output, verify:
- [ ] Every required capability traces to a stated business priority — no orphaned competencies
- [ ] The gap matrix covers every in-scope role × capability with Required, Current, and Gap values
- [ ] Gaps are ranked in a single priority order using both impact and breadth — not alphabetical or grouped
- [ ] Each top gap has a build/buy/borrow recommendation with a stated trade-off and time-to-impact
- [ ] Every assumed proficiency is flagged and collected into the "Assumptions to Validate" section
- [ ] The 90-day plan assigns owners and a measurable checkpoint to each phase
Notes
- The most common error is starting from a generic competency library instead of the business priorities — always derive capabilities top-down from what the function must deliver.
- "Build" looks cheaper but is slower; "Buy" is faster but resets team dynamics; flag when a hard deadline forces buy/borrow even where build is preferable.
- Key-person risk (one expert holding a critical capability) is often a higher priority than a broad 1-level gap — weight breadth accordingly.
- This skill is re-runnable: at the next review, re-assess current proficiency against the same matrix to show movement and recalibrate priorities.
How to use this skill
This file is a Claude Code skill in Anthropic's standard format — markdown with YAML frontmatter at the top.
Installing in Claude Code:
~/.claude/skills/<folder-name>/SKILL.md— auto-loads in every session anywhere on your machine (recommended for skills you'll use across multiple projects)<your-project>/.claude/skills/<folder-name>/SKILL.md— auto-loads only when working in that project (recommended for project-specific skills)
Restart Claude Code or open a new session to register.
Using in Claude.ai, ChatGPT, Gemini, or other AI tools:
- Drag this file into a new chat, or copy and paste its contents
- Send your task or request as your next message — the AI will apply the skill where it fits
For Claude Code skill details: https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code/skills