A skills profile needs evidence
Skills data becomes useful for talent decisions when it is tied to observable evidence of work.
Connect capability to something you can observe.
A system can list hundreds of skills and still leave a leader unsure who could take on a critical assignment. What’s usually missing is evidence, not a finer taxonomy.
Keep the real question in view: who can do this work now, who could grow into it and what gives us confidence? Interest, proficiency and willingness to move are all worth knowing, but they’re different information. Blend them into one score and you blur the talent conversation. OECD research finds most workers in AI-exposed occupations won’t need specialist AI-development skills, though their tasks and skill needs may change.
Where I’d start: pick one job family and define a manageable set of capabilities through examples of work. Record the source and date of each piece of evidence. Let employees correct their profile and discuss development with their manager.
The test: a course completion shows participation. A job title shows a position held. Neither proves the capability a new assignment needs.
Disagree? Tell me on LinkedIn. That’s where the discussion happens.