Skills Gap Analysis Template: Free Excel, With an Example
Get a free skills gap analysis Excel template and worked example. Review task standards, investigate causes and plan follow-up actions.
A skills gap analysis compares required work standards with evidence of what people can do now, then identifies the support or changes needed.
- Self and manager ratings are starting points for discussion. The template calculates gaps from a separate reviewed rating, with space to record its evidence.
- The planning score multiplies gap, importance and frequency. It is an unvalidated sorting aid; critical requirements take priority regardless of score.
- A difficulty can have learning, process, equipment or staffing causes, including a mixture. Investigate before choosing a response.
- Record an owner, review date and success standard for each action, then check the work again to see what changed.
Train teams faster and more effectively with AI
A skills gap analysis compares what people need to do in their work with what they can do now. It helps you decide which skills need attention, what is causing the difficulty and what support to provide. The free Excel template below records that comparison and calculates a planning score for each gap.
Download a blank workbook or follow the completed example for eight restaurant hosts. The guide explains how to agree ratings from evidence, check the causes and choose actions you can follow up.
I'm the COO of Coursebox, and I run our team in Perth. We make HR training software that teams use to build training and track who has completed it.
The restaurant example is fictional. It follows a team dealing with more complaints after a booking-system change. Some tasks need practice; others need a change to the way the work is organised. The spreadsheet helps record both, without assuming that every problem needs a course.
Download the blank template to analyse your own team. The fictional restaurant example includes ratings, evidence, causes, actions and follow-up dates, plus separate samples for care, field sales and maintenance teams.
Open the completed workbook preview at full size
What a skills gap analysis is
A skills gap exists when someone cannot yet perform a task to the standard their role requires. For example, a host may know the restaurant’s complaint procedure but still need help using it with an upset guest. A gap analysis examines that difference and the evidence behind it, then sets out what to do next.
Assessment or analysis?
In this guide, assessment means gathering evidence of current capability. Analysis means comparing that evidence with the required standard, investigating the gap and deciding on a response. The terms overlap in practice, so the useful question is whether you have done both jobs.
| Part of the work | Question it answers | Restaurant example |
|---|---|---|
| Assessment | What can people do, and what evidence supports that judgement? | Observe hosts handling complaints and discuss the results with them. |
| Analysis | What needs to change, why, and how will we check it? | Separate complaint-handling practice from problems caused by two waitlists. |
The workbook has space for both: self and manager ratings, a reviewed rating with its evidence, and a cause, action, owner and follow-up date. It organises your conclusions; it cannot establish a cause for you.
What might be behind a gap?
| Possible explanation | What to investigate | Possible response |
|---|---|---|
| Missing knowledge | Does the person know the relevant information or procedure? | Explain it, provide a job aid and check understanding. |
| A skill that needs practice | Can they explain the task but still need help performing it? | Demonstration, practice and feedback. |
| A changed requirement | What has changed in the role, and which new tasks are required? | Update the standard, then identify any learning or workplace changes needed. |
| Working conditions | Are the tools, instructions, time and staffing adequate? | Change the process or conditions; add learning support where needed. |
| Mixed or uncertain causes | Could several factors be involved, or is the evidence incomplete? | Investigate further or combine actions. |
A host who knows how to maintain a waitlist can still struggle when bookings are split between two systems. In that situation, observe the process before deciding that the person lacks the skill. Knowledge, practice and working conditions can also be involved together.
Open the possible causes diagram at full size
When to investigate
These signs are reasons to look more closely. They do not establish a skills gap on their own:
- The same mistake keeps happening, across different people.
- Complaints or rework rise after something changed, such as a new system or product.
- Work waits for one person who is the only one who can do it.
- New starters take much longer than expected to work on their own.
- People avoid a task, or hand it to someone else.
Gap analysis, skills matrix or needs analysis?
A skills matrix records who can do which tasks and helps you check team coverage. A gap analysis uses the required standards and current evidence to decide what needs attention; it can cover an individual, a team or an organisation. A training needs analysis examines learning needs in their wider organisational and work context. Use a person-by-person record when you need to decide who needs support.
For an individual view, use the skills matrix template alongside this team-level analysis.
How to do a skills gap analysis
The worked example follows eight front-of-house hosts at two fictional restaurants. Assume guest complaints at the door have doubled since a booking-system change. The managers want to find out whether hosts need help handling complaints, whether the new process is causing delays, or both.
Step 1: Start from a problem or a change
Define the result you want and the work you will examine. For these restaurants, that means handling arrivals and complaints consistently at both venues. Review complaint records and observe busy shifts before deciding which tasks belong in the analysis. A future change can be a starting point too: compare the tasks a new system will require with the skills people have now.
Step 2: List the skills, with importance and how often
Write skills as tasks with a recognisable standard. Then rate their importance from 1 to 3, based on the impact of poor performance, and frequency from 1 to 3, from rarely to every shift or day. Mark a critical requirement separately if a gap must take precedence, such as a safety-related task.
“Greet and seat guests within two minutes” gives the restaurant a specific task and an assumed service standard to review. “Customer focus” needs more explanation before two people can rate it consistently. Replace the example’s two-minute target with a standard that fits your operation.
Step 3: Set the level needed
Agree what satisfactory work looks like for each task before collecting ratings. The workbook uses the following ordered categories. They describe different levels of support, not equal units of ability.
| Level | Description | What to look for |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Cannot yet perform the task | Cannot perform the task even with step-by-step help. |
| 1 | Step-by-step help | Needs someone to guide the steps. |
| 2 | With support | Performs the task with checks or help. |
| 3 | Independent | Meets the agreed standard without routine help. |
| 4 | Can coach others | Can explain and demonstrate this task to others. |
Choose the level the role actually requires. In the example, hosts need to handle routine complaints independently, while event enquiries can be referred to the events lead. A level 4 rating does not authorise someone to assess regulated work.
Step 4: Review ratings against evidence
Ask people about their work before asking them to choose a number. Useful questions include:
- Which of these tasks do you do on your own, without checking with anyone?
- Which do you avoid, or hand to someone else?
- Which have you been shown but not had the chance to practise?
- What gets in the way when you do them on a busy shift?
Compare those answers with recent observations, work samples or a suitable practical task. In the example, hosts rate their complaint handling at 3, while managers rate it at 1. Reviewing three observed complaints shows that help was needed. The discussion also reveals that the hosts interpreted “independent” differently. The example records a reviewed rating of 1 and the reason for it.
Enter the evidence in column S and the agreed rating in T. Leave T blank if the evidence is missing. Calculations use T; a manager’s rating does not automatically override a self-rating. For this team-level example, the rating is an illustrative joint judgement about the work observed, not an average of individual scores or a conclusion about every host. Record each person separately before assigning individual support.
Step 5: Score and rank the gaps
The workbook subtracts the reviewed rating from the required level, with a minimum gap of zero. Its planning score is gap × importance × frequency. Complaint handling has a gap of 2, importance 3 and frequency 2, giving a score of 12. The waitlist scores 9. These numbers help organise a discussion; they are not validated measurements of ability or risk.
Reviewed gaps and critical requirements
Example: Fictional joint review of eight restaurant hosts at two venues.
- 1. Reviewed rating: The calculation uses the evidence-reviewed rating, not an automatic manager override.
- 2. Critical requirement: The allergen-information gap takes priority despite its lower score.
- 3. Planning score: The score organises the remaining discussion; it is not a validated measure.
Open this workbook preview at full size
Critical gaps sort ahead of routine scores. In this example, access to approved allergen information needs immediate attention even though its score is only 6. Among other gaps, higher scores come first and ties follow row order. Check the consequences and deadlines yourself rather than treating the first three rows as the only work to do.
Step 6: Find the cause, then pick the fix
Ask what would allow people to meet the standard. The observed complaint conversations suggest a need for learning and practice. A walkthrough of the waitlist shows a different problem: bookings are split between two systems. The allergen example requires approved information at the stand and a clear referral procedure, with a check that hosts know how to use both.
Choose “Mixed causes” when the response needs both learning and workplace changes. Choose “Not yet established” when more investigation is needed. The response column reflects your chosen cause; it does not diagnose the problem or prove that a course will work.
Causes, actions and owners
Example: Fictional joint review of eight restaurant hosts at two venues.
- 1. Waitlist: The example records a process change, owned by the operations manager.
- 2. Complaint handling: An observed learning need leads to practice against agreed criteria.
- 3. Allergen information: Make approved information available and confirm the referral procedure immediately.
Open this workbook preview at full size
The CIPD learning needs analysis guidance recommends considering different ways to meet a need rather than automatically choosing a course. In the workbook, this means recording what the evidence suggests before selecting an action.
If the tool or process prevents satisfactory work, include that change in the action plan. If people also need help using the revised process, provide both. For a critical task, arrange appropriate controls while the longer-term action is completed.
Skills gap analysis examples for other teams
The figure counts first requests in the 180 days to 19 October 2026. It describes what people asked the builder to do, not whether their teams had already analysed their skills elsewhere.
The following fictional samples are included as separate tabs in the example workbook. They suggest questions and possible responses for different settings; investigate the cause before adopting an action.
A care team after a procedure change
| Task | What to check | Possible response |
|---|---|---|
| Use a changed medication procedure | Knowledge of the approved procedure and practical performance. | Approved training and assessment by an authorised assessor before independent work. |
| Record care notes on tablets | Whether devices sync, and whether staff can use them. | Repair device problems and provide help where needed. |
| Use a hoist for transfers | Equipment, local procedures and observed performance. | Supervised practice and assessment under approved safe-handling procedures. |
| Hand over at shift change | Whether required information reaches the next shift. | Agree a handover record and check its use. |
| Support residents with dementia | The person’s role, approved care guidance and support required. | Role-appropriate learning and supervision; a level 2 rating still requires support. |
These are planning examples, not a clinical training programme. Use the approved procedures and assessment requirements for the role. An observation checklist can record evidence, but it does not replace an authorised assessment where one is required.
Field sales after a product launch
| Task | What to check | Possible response |
|---|---|---|
| Explain a new product range | Can the representative accurately demonstrate and explain it? | Product learning followed by a suitable check. |
| Record customer visits | Observe the form in use and check which fields are necessary. | Simplify the process where appropriate and check understanding. |
| Negotiate shelf space | Observe a practice conversation against agreed criteria. | Practice with the area manager and feedback. |
| Visit assigned accounts | Compare travel time, account numbers and available capacity. | Review territory coverage and staffing. |
A form with too many fields may discourage use, but missing records could also reflect unclear expectations or a learning need. Watch someone complete it and ask where they get stuck before choosing the response.
A maintenance team after new equipment
| Task | What to check | Possible response |
|---|---|---|
| Isolate new equipment safely | Approved isolation requirements and demonstrated performance. | Training and assessment by an authorised person before independent work. |
| Find faults in new controls | Which diagnostic steps require help, and whether tools are available. | Supervised practice with a qualified technician. |
| Order spare parts | Whether the required items exist in the stores system. | Update the parts records and explain the ordering process. |
| Plan preventive maintenance | Who owns the schedule and whether time is allocated. | Agree responsibility, resources and review dates. |
If only one technician can diagnose a fault, the team may lack cover even when that person is capable. Use the individual skills matrix to check who can safely take over, and arrange supervised development or external support where needed.
Agree actions and check the result
Give the manager a short decision summary and access to the underlying evidence. Include every critical gap, then a manageable set of other priorities. For each action, record:
- The task, required standard and evidence of the gap.
- The likely cause, including anything still uncertain.
- The action, owner and due or review date.
- The resources needed and the evidence you will use to judge the result.
For the hosts, make approved allergen information available and confirm referral arrangements immediately. Plan complaint-handling practice and merge the waitlists, with owners and review dates. Then observe the work again: can hosts handle the agreed complaint situations, and are bookings reaching one waitlist? Compare the results with the original evidence before changing ratings.
Secure Meters: making learning available when people need it
In the published Secure Meters case study, employees missed classroom sessions because they were travelling or in meetings. The company built a self-paced library of 40 courses so new joiners could work through foundational learning on their own schedules.
Their response changed access to learning as well as the content available. When employees miss essential learning, check the practical barriers to taking part alongside the knowledge they need.
Common problems, and how to avoid them
| Problem | What to check | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Almost every task has a gap | Are the required levels justified by the work? | Agree task-specific standards before changing the ratings. |
| Self and manager ratings disagree | Did they use the same criteria and see the same work? | Discuss examples, gather more evidence and record a reviewed rating. |
| Different managers score differently | Are the task standards clear? | Review the same work sample together and compare their reasoning. |
| A low-frequency task has a low score | Could an error have serious consequences? | Mark critical requirements and arrange appropriate action regardless of score. |
| Actions have no result | Was there an owner, review date and success standard? | Record these in the workbook and review evidence after the change. |
When a gap analysis isn't enough
- To plan one person's growth, turn their gaps into a development plan.
- To map skills across a whole organisation, see skill mapping and competency mapping.
- To build the training for the gaps that need it, start with a course outline.
- To check the training worked, re-rate the skills, then evaluate the programme.
Once you have identified a learning need, Coursebox can help you build a course and add knowledge checks. Use the analysis to specify the task learners need to perform. Check practical work separately where the role requires it: course completion or a quiz result alone does not show that someone can perform the job.
The downloads are version 1.1, reviewed on 21 October 2026. The Excel files support 15 skills and were tested in Excel for Windows. Other spreadsheet platforms are untested. The PDF is a static worked example.
Closing your team's skills gaps
Start with the work people need to do and agree the standard. Use evidence to review current skills, investigate what is preventing satisfactory work, and assign actions with a clear way to check the result. Keep the workbook up to date when the work changes or new evidence becomes available.
For an identified training need, use Coursebox’s HR training software to build the course and track completion. Use suitable workplace evidence to check whether the skill has improved.
Frequently Asked Questions
A comparison between the standard a role requires and evidence of current capability. It investigates the difference and sets out actions, owners and follow-up checks. A team summary does not establish each individual’s capability.
Here, assessment means gathering evidence of current skills. Analysis compares that evidence with the required work standard, investigates causes and decides what action to take. The terms overlap in practice.
Start with the tasks the team needs to perform. Gather observations, work samples and employee input, then compare the evidence with agreed standards. Repeated mistakes or complaints are reasons to investigate, not proof of a skill deficit.
Address critical requirements first. Then consider the effect on the work, urgency, frequency and resources available. This template calculates a gap × importance × frequency score as a planning aid; it is not a validated risk or ability measure.
Review when the role, systems, requirements or available evidence change. Set a review date for each action so you can check the result. Choose a wider review cycle that fits the work rather than assuming one annual interval suits every team.
Alex Hey
Alex Hey is a technical marketer with 10 years of hands-on growth and digital marketing experience. He cofounded Coursebox together with Travis Clapp who he met online when looking for a cofounder to build a globally impactful software product. He works in the Perth, Western Australia office as the COO. He built the world's first automated funnel for patient recruitment before building Coursebox. After launching Coursebox in mid 2023, he drove +400k organic sign ups for Coursebox. Alex leads the marketing and digital growth of Coursebox and works with the product development team bringing a passion for data-driven product decision and exceptional user experience. Alex is determined to build the world's easiest way to build the perfect course.
