The World Economic Forum puts a number on the challenge: 44% of workers’ current skills will be disrupted by 2027. Within organizations, this figure translates into a very real phenomenon: the skills gap, which is widening in most companies, even though leaders do not always have the tools to measure it. When available skills no longer meet operational needs, projects stall, hiring is used as a short-term fix for what training could have resolved long-term, and collective performance pays the price.

What is a skills gap?

A skills gap is the discrepancy between the skills possessed by an organization’s employees and those required by the organization to achieve its goals. It can affect an individual, a team, or an entire organization, and can manifest in technical skills as well as managerial or interpersonal skills.

The definition is simple. What is less so is detecting it before it becomes visible. An IT department lacking cybersecurity expertise, a marketing department struggling to leverage its customer data, a management team uncomfortable with decision-making in uncertain situations: each of these cases represents a skill gap. Some are immediately apparent. Others develop gradually and only become apparent when a strategic project stalls or a market opportunity is missed.

There are two main categories:

  • Gaps in hard skills: technical skills, proficiency with specific tools, and domain knowledge in finance, data, law, engineering, or project management.
  • Gaps in soft skills: interpersonal skills, leadership, communication, adaptability, change management, and emotional intelligence.

The blind spot for many organizations: they find it easier to identify technical gaps, yet systematically underestimate behavioral gaps—which are often the very factors that derail projects and hinder career advancement. A team equipped with the right tools but led by a manager who doesn’t know how to drive change will remain an underperforming team. Skill gap analysis must address both dimensions.

It is also important to distinguish between individual skill gaps and organizational skill gaps. The former refers to an individual whose skills fall below the level required for their position. The latter refers to a collective shortfall: the organization as a whole lacks the skills necessary to execute its strategy. This second level is harder to measure but far more costly to ignore.

Why the skills gap is widening in companies

The skills gap is not a recent phenomenon. However, three distinct forces have accelerated its pace since 2020, to the point of rendering certain multi-year skills development plans obsolete.

Digital transformation has changed the nature of nearly every profession, often faster than training cycles can keep up with. An accountant who can’t read a data dashboard, an HR manager with no experience using performance analytics tools, a manager who has never led a team: these situations have become commonplace. The arrival of generative AI in the workplace has further accelerated the process. Skills considered solid in 2022 will be partially outdated by 2025, not because individuals have regressed, but because the nature of the requirements has changed.

The Swiss labor market creates an additional challenge. The structurally low unemployment rate in French-speaking Switzerland means that companies are recruiting from a limited talent pool. They cannot consistently fill their skill gaps through external hiring. According to the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), certain sectors are facing shortages of qualified personnel that will not be resolved in the short term. In this context, internal upskilling is no longer an option: it is an operational response to a market constraint.

Third factor: the speed at which strategic priorities evolve. When an organization pivots toward a more agile model, adopts new technology, or enters a new market, the required skills change faster than traditional training plans can adapt. Organizations that manage this issue well have one thing in common: they anticipate future skill gaps rather than reacting to those that are already visible.

How to conduct a skill gap analysis in a company

Skill gap analysis is a structured process for measuring skill gaps and developing an action plan based on the findings. It is not limited to large companies with extensive HR departments. An SME with 30 employees can conduct a streamlined version of the analysis and draw operational conclusions from it. The process consists of four steps.

1. Define the required skills

Start with the organization’s strategic objectives for the next 12 to 24 months. What skills are needed to achieve them? This step requires the involvement of front-line managers and executives: they are the ones who know exactly what is needed to move forward. A skills framework for each position or role is a useful tool to develop here, even in a simplified form.

2. Assess current skills

Several methods are used: structured interviews, self-assessments, technical tests, role-playing exercises, and on-the-job observation. Each has its limitations. Self-assessments may overestimate or underestimate skills depending on the organizational culture and the individuals’ profiles. Technical tests measure knowledge, but not always the ability to apply it under pressure. Combining two or three methods provides a more reliable picture than a single approach.

3. Measure and map the gap

Create a skills-employee matrix. For each skill identified as required, assess the current level of each relevant employee on a consistent scale (for example, from 1 to 4: beginner, self-sufficient, expert, internal trainer). The gap between the target level and the actual level constitutes your measurable skill gap. This mapping often reveals unexpected concentrations of skills: isolated experts whose departure would create a real vulnerability, or entire teams falling below the required threshold for a skill deemed to have been acquired.

4. Prioritize actions based on their impact

Not all skill gaps warrant the same level of urgency. Consider two factors: the business impact if the skill gap is not closed within 12 months, and the realistic timeframe for closing it. Skill gaps with a high impact that can be closed quickly take priority. The others are included in a multi-year skills development plan. Be careful not to include every gap in the first category: a list of 25 priorities is not a priority.

Upskilling, reskilling, and continuing education: What solutions are available for your organization?

Once skill gaps have been identified and prioritized, there are three approaches to closing them, depending on their nature and severity.

Upskilling involves deepening an employee’s skills in their current field. It is the logical response to technological advancements: a marketing manager learning to use generative AI tools, a financial controller strengthening their mastery of ESG reporting standards, or a manager developing their feedback practices. Short, targeted programs work well here, provided they are aligned with the actual needs of the role.

Reskilling prepares an employee to take on a different role. It addresses deeper skill gaps linked to structural changes in a profession or organization. It requires more time, investment, and managerial support. It can also help retain talent whose current role is set to undergo significant changes, rather than letting them leave for organizations that offer a clearer career path.

Continuing education is designed for professionals who wish to address structural gaps in their skills while earning formal recognition. The Certificates and Diplomas in Advanced Studies offered by HEC Lausanne Executive Education specifically cover the areas where skill gaps are most prevalent in French-speaking Switzerland: management, leadership, data, finance, change management, and strategy. The advantage of these programs is that they combine theoretical content with practical case studies drawn from both Swiss and international contexts, featuring cohorts of executives facing similar challenges.

One limitation to keep in mind: training alone does not bridge a skills gap if the conditions for applying it are not in place. An employee who takes a course in change management but returns to an organization that discourages initiative will not apply what they have learned. The transfer of skills to the workplace is often the weak link in training plans. The role of line management in creating conditions conducive to application is often underestimated in upskilling plans.