CASE STUDY
Helping Grupo AKRON boost skill development across their team
Stay up to date with all our latest news
Subscribe to our newsletter Stay up to date with all our latest news
August 24, 2026
CONTENT CREATED BY:

Table of contents
Fast-growing organisations always run into the same problem: they do not know exactly what their team knows, or what it is missing. A competency matrix solves that. It is the tool that turns your company’s talent into something visible, measurable and actionable.
A competency matrix is a structured visual system built on two axes: the roles or job positions covered and the competencies required for each (technical, behavioural or transversal). Each cell records a person’s current level of mastery, which can then be compared against the expected level to reveal gaps.
Its purpose goes well beyond description. According to the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2023, 44% of core job skills will change within the next five years. In that context, having an accurate, up-to-date picture of available talent is a real competitive advantage.
The matrix serves as the starting point for three key decisions in HR and L&D:
Want to understand how to detect your team’s gaps before designing the matrix? Read our guide on skill gap analysis and our article on the competency map, a complementary tool.
Although the two terms are often used interchangeably, they are not exactly the same. A skills matrix focuses on specific, measurable technical abilities: knows Excel, speaks B2 English, codes in Python. A competency matrix goes a step further: it also covers behaviours, attitudes and transversal competencies such as leadership, communication or adaptability.
The table below summarises the key differences:
| Criteria | Competency matrix | Skills matrix |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Technical + behavioural + transversal | Primarily technical |
| Measurement level | Mastery levels + observed behaviour | Technical mastery levels |
| Main use | Talent management, L&D, succession | Project assignment, technical hiring |
| Ideal for | Companies with a holistic development strategy | Technical teams or specific projects |
Both tools are complementary. In practice, many organisations start with a skills matrix and evolve towards a full competency matrix as their talent strategy matures. To go deeper on the differences between these types of competencies, read our article on hard skills vs. soft skills.
A well-built matrix always includes the same essential components:
The most critical element — and the one that most distinguishes a good matrix from a generic one — is the definition of mastery levels. Without clear criteria, assessment becomes subjective and inconsistent across teams. Below is the scale most widely used in medium and large organisations:
| Level | Description | How it is assessed |
|---|---|---|
| 0 – Not assessed | Not yet evaluated or not applicable to the role | — |
| 1 – Basic | Understands the concept but requires constant supervision | Self-assessment + direct observation |
| 2 – Intermediate | Applies the competency autonomously in standard situations | Manager assessment + work evidence |
| 3 – Advanced | Masters the competency and resolves complex situations | 360° assessment + reference projects |
| 4 – Expert | Internal reference; actively trains others in the competency | Peer review + high-impact projects |
In addition to the technical competencies specific to each function, every corporate matrix should include a block of transversal competencies: communication, teamwork, adaptability, critical thinking. If you want to explore how to identify and develop them, our complete guide to soft skills is a great starting point.
A well-implemented competency matrix is much more than an inventory. It is the foundation on which training, promotion and hiring decisions are made. These are its six main uses:
By comparing each person’s current level against the level required for their role, the matrix immediately makes gaps visible. This enables training to be prioritised where it truly matters, rather than launching generic programmes. Learn in detail how to approach this process in our article on how to close the skills gap in your organisation.
With gaps identified, the L&D team can design targeted training plans matched exactly to the needs of each person or team. This maximises the return on training investment and reduces time to competence. Read how to structure these processes in our article on employee development plans.
The matrix surfaces who has the potential to take on new responsibilities. This facilitates internal moves, reduces reliance on external hires and improves retention. According to McKinsey (2023), organisations with strong internal mobility strategies see up to 32% less voluntary turnover.
By establishing expected levels per role, the matrix provides objective criteria for performance reviews. Manager–employee conversations move away from subjectivity and are grounded in concrete evidence.
Organisations can anticipate which competencies they will need in 12 or 24 months and start developing them today. This is essential in sectors undergoing rapid digital or regulatory change.
With the matrix as a reference, job profiles are far more precise. And once someone joins, onboarding can be personalised based on the gaps detected relative to the expected level for their role. If your organisation is reviewing how to improve this process, also check our comparison of the best onboarding software.
Together, these six uses connect the matrix to the complete corporate learning cycle: detect the gap → design training → train → re-evaluate. When that cycle runs continuously, the organisation’s competencies grow in step with the business.
When decisions about promotions, rotations or hires are based on objective data rather than subjective perceptions, the organisation acts with greater agility and less bias. According to LinkedIn’s Global Talent Trends 2024 report, companies with structured competency assessment processes make talent decisions 40% faster.
Instead of one-size-fits-all training, each person receives exactly what they need. This improves the employee experience, increases programme completion rates and reduces cost per competency acquired. The competency-based learning approach is the methodological framework that fits this model best.
Employees who see a clear professional development path have stronger reasons to stay. A training plan linked to their personal competency matrix reinforces engagement and sense of purpose. According to Gallup (2023), employees who receive personalised training are 23% more likely to recommend their company as a great place to work.
Knowing which people have the required level for key roles enables assignment decisions to be made with confidence. And when someone leaves, the matrix makes it easier to identify who can cover that function internally or what profile to look for externally. This is particularly relevant in organisations with active upskilling and reskilling programmes.
Grupo Puerto de Cartagena is a strong example of how an organisation can structure competency development systematically. With isEazy Skills, they managed their team’s learning by linking training content to specific competencies, improving both employee satisfaction and programme completion rates. Find out how they did it →
Building a matrix from scratch may seem complex, but a structured process produces results quickly. These are the essential steps:
Decide whether the matrix will cover the entire organisation, a specific department or a set of roles. Starting with a pilot area (for example, the sales or operations team) allows you to validate the model before scaling it.
Work with team leads and HR to list the competencies that truly matter for each role. Combine technical (hard skills) and transversal (soft skills) competencies. Avoid lists that are too long: 8 to 15 competencies per role is typical.
Use a standardised scale (such as the level table shown above) and document what each level means in terms of observable behaviours. This step is critical to ensure consistent assessment across different managers.
For each competency, define the minimum level needed to perform the role correctly. This benchmark is what makes it possible to calculate real gaps.
Combine employee self-assessment with manager evaluation. Where possible, incorporate 360° feedback (from peers and direct reports). Document the evidence that justifies each score.
With data in hand, identify the most critical gaps (those affecting key roles or the highest number of people) and design the corresponding employee development plans. Prioritise by business impact, not just by volume.
A matrix that is not updated becomes an irrelevant document. Establish a review cadence (annually as a minimum, ideally twice a year) aligned with performance review cycles. When the company adopts new technologies or changes its business model, the matrix must reflect this.
Managing a matrix in Excel has a clear limit: it works for small teams, but when it scales to tens or hundreds of people, maintenance becomes a bottleneck and data loses reliability. Digitalisation is not a future option; it is a present necessity for any company with more than 50 employees.
Specialist platforms for competency management centralise all information, automate periodic assessments and generate real-time gap views. Tools like isEazy Skills combine competency management with a curated content library, closing the complete cycle: detect the gap → assign training → re-evaluate.
Integration between the competency matrix and the corporate LMS means that when a gap is detected, the relevant course or learning path is automatically assigned. The employee receives training at exactly the moment they need it, and the system records progress automatically.
With digitalisation, periodic assessments stop being a manual and costly process. Managers receive automatic reminders, employees complete self-assessments within the platform, and data is consolidated without the need to cross-reference spreadsheets. This frees up HR time for strategic analysis rather than operational administration.
Beyond operational efficiency, digitalisation delivers three strategic advantages:
A competency matrix only delivers value when it is used to make decisions. Understanding what each employee knows, what their role requires, and where the main gaps are makes it possible to prioritize training, support internal mobility, and anticipate the capabilities the organization will need in the future.
That is why a competency matrix should not be treated as a static snapshot or simply as a spreadsheet. It should be part of an ongoing process: assessing competencies, identifying development needs, activating development plans, and measuring team progress. Keeping it up to date helps align talent with business goals and turn skills gaps into opportunities for growth.
With isEazy Skills, you can connect identified development needs with practical, up-to-date training in digital skills and power skills, creating upskilling and reskilling programs tailored to your teams. Request a demo and discover how to develop the skills your organization needs.
Although both tools map what people know and can do, a skills matrix focuses on specific, measurable technical abilities (e.g. uses Excel, speaks B2 English, codes in Python), while a competency matrix goes further by also covering behavioural and transversal competencies such as leadership, communication or adaptability. Both are complementary: many organisations start with a skills matrix and evolve towards a full competency matrix as their talent strategy matures.
Competency levels are defined using a standardised scale — typically from 0 to 4 or from Basic to Expert. Each level must be described with observable behaviours, not vague adjectives. For example, Level 1 (Basic) means the person understands the concept but requires constant supervision, while Level 4 (Expert) means they are an internal reference and actively train others. Clear definitions are what prevent inconsistent assessments across different managers.
Any organisation with more than 15–20 people and a structured HR or L&D function benefits from a competency matrix. It is particularly valuable in fast-growing companies (where roles evolve quickly), heavily regulated industries (where role compliance must be traceable), and organisations undergoing digital transformation (where new competencies emerge faster than training can keep up). Small teams can start with a simplified version in a spreadsheet.
A matrix that is not updated becomes irrelevant. Best practice is to review it at least twice a year, aligned with performance review cycles. Updates are triggered by: new technologies or processes adopted by the company, changes in role responsibilities, feedback from managers on gaps that have appeared or closed, and the results of training programmes completed since the last review. Digital platforms automate these reminders and consolidate data without manual spreadsheet work.
Yes — and this is where the real value is unlocked. When the competency matrix is integrated with an LMS or skills management platform, the gap-to-training cycle becomes automatic: a detected gap triggers the assignment of the relevant course or learning path, and the system records completion and re-evaluates the competency level. Platforms like isEazy Skills are designed precisely for this closed-loop approach, combining competency management with a curated content library.
The most frequent mistakes are: (1) defining too many competencies — a list of 30+ competencies per role becomes unmanageable; keep it to 8–15; (2) using vague level descriptions — without observable criteria, assessments are inconsistent; (3) building the matrix in isolation — involving team leads and employees improves accuracy and buy-in; (4) never updating it — an outdated matrix is worse than no matrix; and (5) treating it as an HR document instead of a live operational tool used in everyday management decisions.
Effectiveness can be measured through several indicators: reduction in the skills gap between current and required levels over time, improvement in performance review scores, increase in internal mobility rate (promotions and lateral moves filled from within), reduction in time-to-competence for new hires and role transitions, and higher training completion rates when courses are assigned based on identified gaps rather than generic plans. These metrics provide the data to justify the L&D budget and demonstrate ROI.