Free Competency Framework Template | Role-Based Examples & Proficiency Levels
Free Competency Framework Template | Role-Based Examples & Proficiency Levels
Skills have become a company’s real currency, yet most tools meant to manage them are not doing the job. One global survey found that 85% of organisations already use talent systems, but only 6% rate them as “outstanding” for closing skills gaps and supporting decisions[1]. For many HR teams in DACH, “competency management software” still means static spreadsheets hidden behind a pretty UI.
A modern competency management software should do far more than list skills. In practice, it should help you:
- Define a consistent skills taxonomy and role profiles across your organisation
- Assess employees and managers in a structured, comparable way
- Run gap analysis at individual, team and company level
- Link skills to learning, development plans and internal career paths
- Feed skill data into performance reviews, succession and workforce planning
So why are so many HR teams in Germany, Austria and Switzerland frustrated with their current tools?
- Taxonomies are too generic or outdated, and hard to adapt to German role naming
- Interfaces are complex, employees do not update data, managers ignore dashboards
- Data quality is weak: self-assessments with no validation, no audit trail
- Skills sit in an L&D silo instead of driving promotions, pay or internal mobility
- Works councils raise concerns around transparency, surveillance and GDPR
This guide helps you avoid those traps. It focuses on 9 concrete questions you should ask vendors before you buy competency management software, grouped into 3 themes:
- Skills & Role Architecture: how your skills and role model is built and governed
- Performance, Careers & Internal Mobility: how skills affect real people decisions
- Data, AI & Governance: how data is captured, automated and protected
By the end, you will know which questions to ask, what “good” looks like in a DACH context, and how to spot red flags early. So what should you really look for before investing? Let’s break it down into the nine must-ask questions.
Theme A: Skills & Role Architecture
1. Skills taxonomies & role profiles: your single source of truth
Without a unified skills and role model, your data stays fragmented and unreliable. Competency management software should replace isolated Excel files with one “source of truth” for roles, competencies and proficiency levels. That means it must support both global frameworks and local DACH specifics.
Europe’s ESCO classification alone contains 13,485 skill and competence concepts[2]. If your tool simply dumps all of them into a picklist, employees and managers will give up quickly.
Key sub-questions to ask vendors:
- Does the system provide a starter library of skills and role profiles (e.g. based on ESCO, SFIA or industry standards)?
- How many skills are preloaded, and can we import our own frameworks (e.g. IHK job families, internal Kompetenzrahmen)?
- How often is the library updated, and who maintains it?
- Can we localise role titles, skill names and descriptions to German and English?
- Can HR easily merge, retire or rename redundant skills without IT support?
What good looks like:
- A structured, extensible skills library you can search, filter and edit
- Out-of-the-box support for German job nomenclature (e.g. Fachkraft, Meister, Sachbearbeiter)
- Multi-language role and skill descriptions with clear version control
- Simple tools for HR to clean up duplicates and retire outdated skills
Example from practice: A 300-person German manufacturer moved from scattered Excel skill matrices to a central platform with prebuilt roles aligned to IHK standards. Once roles and skills were standardised, the HR team could finally run consistent workforce planning across plants.
| Platform | Pre-built skills | Localization | Update frequency |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sprad | 32,000+ skills | DE/EN | Monthly |
| Personio | 8,000+ | DE/EN | Quarterly |
| Lattice | 5,000+ | EN | Annually |
The key is not just the size of the library but how easily you can adapt it to your own role architecture in DACH.
2. Managing complexity: avoiding skills overload
Competency management projects rarely fail on technology. They fail because the skill model gets too complex. If you track every tiny tool as a separate skill, employees stop updating profiles and managers stop reading reports.
Best practice is to keep the active library lean. Many experts recommend focusing on roughly 150–250 core skills for the first phase instead of thousands of granular items. Tools that encourage “skill sprawl” will drag adoption down.
Key sub-questions to ask vendors:
- How many skills does the base library include, and can we deactivate most of them?
- Can we group related skills under broader categories (e.g. “Excel Pivot Tables” under “Data Analysis”)?
- Does the system auto-suggest existing skills to prevent duplicates?
- Can we limit the number of skills per role to keep profiles usable?
- Can admins merge similar skills without losing historic data?
What good looks like:
- You can start small: a curated list of 150–200 core skills per business area
- End users pick from controlled lists instead of free-text fields
- Admins have tools to merge and nest skills when overlaps appear
- The UI hides low-level technical variants from everyday users
Hypothetical example: A 150-person IT services firm initially imported an entire ESCO list and ended up with 2,000+ skills. Nobody filled out profiles. After reducing it to a “Top 150” curated set and grouping specific frameworks under broader families, profile completion jumped from 30% to 70% in one quarter.
| Skill list | Number of skills for “Data Analyst” role | User adoption rate |
|---|---|---|
| Initial (too granular) | 50 | 30% |
| Curated (clustered) | 12 | 70% |
| Optimised with clear levels | 10 | 80% |
In DACH organisations, it also helps when proficiency levels match common patterns (e.g. Anfänger, Fortgeschritten, Experte) instead of overly complex 7-level schemes that no manager can explain.
3. Role profiles & career levels: structuring progression
Skill lists alone do not drive careers. You need clear role templates and career ladders. For DACH companies, those must often align with existing grading systems, Tarifverträge or Betriebsvereinbarungen.
A strong competency management software lets you define role profiles such as “Junior Controller”, “Senior Controller” or “Teamleiter Vertrieb” with specific skill and level requirements for each step.
Key sub-questions to ask vendors:
- Can we build role profiles that bundle skills with required proficiency levels?
- Can we model career ladders (Junior → Professional → Senior → Lead) across functions?
- Can we clone profiles for similar roles across locations (e.g. DE/AT/CH) and adapt them?
- Are multiple language versions of the same role supported?
- Can we link role changes to defined promotion criteria and documentation for the works council?
What good looks like:
- HR and business leaders can jointly define role templates in a simple UI
- Each role has a transparent skill checklist, visible to employees
- Career steps are clearly described and linked to expected competencies
- Profile changes trigger configurable workflows, including optional works council review
Example: A German engineering company defined a ladder from “Fachkraft” to “Meister” to “Teamleiter Produktion”. Each step requires agreed skills such as “Qualitätsmanagement” at a defined level. Employees now see exactly what is needed for the next step, and managers justify promotion decisions based on the same framework.
| Level | Example title | Key required skills |
|---|---|---|
| Junior Engineer | Ingenieur (Junior) | Basic CAD, technical documentation, teamwork |
| Senior Engineer | Ingenieur (Senior) | Advanced CAD, project coordination, mentoring |
| Meister | Meister Produktion | Project management, auditing, people leadership |
Once roles and levels are structured, the next step is to connect them tightly to performance and promotion processes.
Theme B: Performance, Careers & Internal Mobility
4. Performance reviews: linking skills to evaluation & promotion
If your skills framework lives separately from your performance processes, it will lose importance quickly. Competency management software should make skills highly visible in reviews, calibration and promotion planning.
Only about 20% of companies say their talent strategies are fully aligned with business goals[1], often because skills, objectives and pay decisions sit in different systems.
Key sub-questions to ask vendors:
- Can we include skill ratings and gaps directly in annual reviews and 360° feedback?
- Can promotion workflows check whether defined competency thresholds are met?
- Is there support for calibration panels, including access to skill history?
- Can training completions and certifications flow into competency evaluations?
- Does the system provide exportable, audit-ready reports for Betriebsrat or auditors?
What good looks like:
- Managers see a combined view of objectives, behaviour and skills during reviews
- Promotion criteria are clearly defined and checked automatically
- All changes to skill ratings and decisions are logged with time and author
- Reports show how skills influenced promotions and pay in a transparent way
Example: A Swiss pharma company integrated its competency framework into the review form. Calibration rounds use skill scores and behavioural indicators to validate every pay bump. Because every change has an audit trail, HR can respond calmly when the works council asks how decisions were made.
| Review step | Manual vs. automated | Tool support |
|---|---|---|
| Identify skill gaps | Automated | Gap analysis against target role |
| Manager discussion | Manual | Review UI with skill history |
| Promotion decision | Semi-automated | Workflow checks defined criteria |
| Audit reporting | Automated | Export of decisions and justifications |
When skills truly drive performance decisions, employees also take self-development more seriously.
5. Can managers see skill gaps and growth suggestions for their teams?
Managers are your main users. If they cannot see team skills and concrete development options, competency management software becomes an HR-only database.
Modern systems offer skill heatmaps and matrices where managers spot critical gaps at a glance. They also suggest learning content, mentors or stretch assignments to close those gaps.
Key sub-questions to ask vendors:
- Does the platform provide team-level skill dashboards or heatmaps?
- Can managers filter by skill, location, role or seniority?
- Are development suggestions (courses, projects, mentors) generated for each gap?
- Can managers track progress over time and see whether gaps are shrinking?
- Is there a way to export team skill data for workforce planning workshops?
What good looks like:
- Managers open one view to see who in their team meets which skill levels
- Tools propose recommended learning actions and possible internal moves
- Progress is visible after each review or learning completion
- HR can support managers with structured reports instead of manual Excel work
Example: A 500-person software company in Bavaria equipped engineering managers with a skills matrix for cloud, security and data topics. They discovered several “hidden experts” who had advanced skills but were never considered for senior roles. After targeted mentoring and project assignments, 3 of those employees moved into lead positions instead of leaving for competitors.
6. How does it match people to internal opportunities?
Internal mobility is one of the strongest levers for retention and cost savings. But it only works if employees see relevant opportunities and if recruiters see internal talent in time.
Competency management software can power an internal talent marketplace by matching roles to skills. Research on hidden tech talent shows that transparent internal markets help companies fill critical roles faster and keep scarce skills in-house[3].
Key sub-questions to ask vendors:
- Does the platform include an internal job board or talent marketplace feature?
- Are internal job requirements defined in the same skill language as your profiles?
- Can employees receive alerts when a new role matches most of their skills?
- Can HR or hiring managers search internal profiles based on specific skill filters?
- Can you configure rules to respect internal posting obligations and Betriebsrat agreements?
What good looks like:
- Employees see personalised suggestions for internal roles and projects
- Managers search for internal candidates before going to the external market
- Job matching uses the same skills taxonomy as performance and development
- All processes respect local rules, including timelines and transparency standards in DACH
Example: An Austrian financial services company connected their competency management system with their internal careers page. Employees receive weekly suggestions like “You match 8 out of 10 skills for this role” and can see which 2 skills they still need. This transparency reduced external hiring for mid-level roles and increased perceived fairness in career opportunities.
Theme C: Data, AI & Governance
7. How are skills captured and validated?
Data quality is the backbone of any competency management software. If employees can freely type any skill at any level, and nobody checks it, your reports will mislead rather than guide.
To stay credible in a DACH environment, with strong employee rights and co-determination, you need clear rules for skill capture and validation.
Key sub-questions to ask vendors:
- Who can add or change skills on an employee profile (employee, manager, HR)?
- Is self-assessment possible, and how is it validated or calibrated?
- Can managers or peers endorse or contest skills and levels?
- Are there built-in assessments, tests or quizzes for critical competencies?
- Are all changes logged with timestamps and user IDs (audit log)?
What good looks like:
- Multi-source input: self-assessment plus manager and peer signals
- Evidence attached where needed (certificates, project work, training completions)
- Clear workflows for confirmation and dispute of skill levels
- Full audit trail to answer “who changed what, when and why”
Example: A German logistics company set up an annual “skills calibration” cycle. Employees update profiles first. Then managers review and confirm or adjust levels. For safety-critical skills, HR only accepts levels connected to valid certificates. This combination keeps the system realistic and trusted by both employees and works council.
8. What AI automation is offered, and what stays manual?
Most vendors now advertise AI features in their competency management software. Without clear boundaries, you risk black-box automation that confuses employees and alarms the works council.
Useful AI can:
- Suggest skills for a role based on job descriptions
- Infer possible skills from CVs or profiles
- Recommend learning content for specific gaps
- Highlight internal candidates who are close to a role’s requirements
But soft skills like leadership, communication and teamwork still need human judgement. According to LinkedIn data, communication remains one of the most in-demand job skills and 90% of executives say soft skills are as or more important than AI-specific capabilities[4].
Key sub-questions to ask vendors:
- Which features are AI-driven (e.g. CV parsing, skill suggestions, job matching)?
- On what data are models trained, and how often are they updated?
- Can HR and managers override AI suggestions easily?
- Are employees informed when AI is used, and can they contest decisions?
- Does the vendor avoid fully automated decisions on promotions or pay?
What good looks like:
- AI acts as an assistant, not a decision-maker
- Suggested skills and matches are always reviewable and editable
- Vendors are transparent about training data and model logic
- AI features can be configured or limited if works council demands it
Example: A Berlin tech company uses AI to pre-fill skills on new roles. HR reviews and adjusts the list before publishing. For employees, AI suggests potential skills based on their CV, but they must actively confirm each suggestion. This keeps speed high and control in human hands.
9. Where is data hosted and how is it governed?
For DACH organisations, data protection and works council approval are not afterthoughts. They are go/no-go criteria. Any competency management software must meet strict GDPR, AVV and co-determination requirements from day one.
You should know exactly where data is stored, who can access it, how long it is kept and how employees can exercise their rights.
Key sub-questions to ask vendors:
- Where are your primary and backup data centres located? Is EU-only hosting possible?
- Do you offer a standard Auftragsverarbeitungsvertrag (Art. 28 DSGVO)?
- How is data encrypted in transit and at rest?
- Can we fully export raw skill data (e.g. CSV, API) at any time?
- Can reports be anonymised or aggregated to address works council concerns?
What good looks like:
- Clear EU hosting, ideally with German or other EU data centres
- Signed AVV and documented technical and organisational measures
- Role-based access control and fine-grained permissions
- Configurable retention periods and deletion processes for leavers
- Audit logs for system access and data changes
Example: A large German insurer involved the works council from the start. Together with HR and IT security, they defined exactly which skill data managers could see, for which purpose and for how long. The vendor configured standard reports to show only aggregated skill distributions by team. Individual data is visible only to the line manager and HR, with clear justification.
Implementation & Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
Even the best competency management software will fail if you underestimate implementation and ongoing costs. For DACH HR leaders, two questions matter: how much effort will this take, and what will it really cost over 3–5 years?
Typical project phases:
- Pilot and discovery: clarify objectives, involve key stakeholders, especially works council
- Framework design: adapt skills taxonomy and role architecture to your organisation
- Data migration: clean up old Excel matrices and import core data
- Integration: connect HRIS, SSO/SCIM and (optionally) LMS and ATS
- Rollout & change: train admins, managers and employees, run targeted communications
Cost benchmarks from market analyses:
- Implementation alone often equals 25–100% of the annual licence fee for mid-sized organisations
- Integrations can add €2,000–10,000 per system if no standard connector exists
- Change management (training, workshops, communication) can consume another €5,000–15,000
On the licensing side, you will typically see:
- Per-user subscription between roughly €5–10 per user/month for specialist tools
- Higher prices, up to €50 per user/month or more, for large talent suites with many modules
- Extra fees for advanced modules (e.g. internal talent marketplace, advanced analytics, AI add-ons)
Key pricing questions to ask vendors:
- Which features are included in the base price, and which are paid add-ons?
- Is SSO/SCIM included or billed separately?
- How many admin or manager licences are included?
- Are implementation and training charged as fixed packages or time & material?
- What happens to our data if we cancel (export options, deletion, access period)?
Compared to traditional talent suites, a focused competency management system can often be deployed faster and at lower licence cost. However, if you already pay for a large suite, check whether a competency module is included or would require another expensive upgrade. Sometimes, combining a lean specialist tool with your existing HRIS gives you the best balance of cost, usability and adoption.
Conclusion: choosing competency management software that people will use
Competency management software is only useful if employees, managers and HR actually use it. That means:
- A skills and role architecture that reflects your real organisation, not a theoretical model
- Deep integration into performance, careers and internal mobility, so skills matter for decisions
- Solid data capture, transparent AI use and governance that reassures both employees and works council
For DACH HR leaders, three pragmatic next steps help reduce risk:
- Start with a clear scope: which roles and skill families will you cover in the first 6–12 months?
- Use the 9 questions from this guide as an RFP checklist when speaking to vendors
- Plan time for design and change management, not just tool configuration
The skills landscape will keep changing, especially with AI, new technologies and demographic shifts. A well-chosen competency management software will not freeze you in today’s structure. It will give you a flexible, governed way to update skills, roles and career paths as your organisation evolves.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What is competency management software in simple terms?
Competency management software is a system that helps you define, track and develop the skills and behaviours your organisation needs. It typically includes a skills library, role and level profiles, assessments, gap analysis, links to learning and sometimes internal job matching. For HR, it replaces scattered spreadsheets with one consistent view of who can do what and where development is needed.
How is competency management software different from a traditional HRIS?
A traditional HRIS focuses on core data like contracts, salaries and absences. Competency management software focuses on people’s capabilities: skills, competencies, potential and match to roles. Some HRIS suites offer basic competency modules, but they often lack flexible taxonomies, gap analysis or strong manager dashboards. Many organisations combine an HRIS for admin with a dedicated skills platform for talent decisions.
How long does it take to implement competency management software?
For a 100–500 employee company, a realistic timeline is 8–16 weeks from project start to first go-live. The technical setup is often quick; the real work lies in designing your skills and role model, migrating data and aligning with stakeholders like works council. Enterprise projects can take several months, especially if you roll out in phases by business unit or country.
What should we involve the works council in, and when?
In Germany and parts of Austria and Switzerland, the works council should be involved early whenever systems affect employee data or performance evaluation. Present the purpose of the tool (development, mobility, transparency), the data points you plan to store, and how access rights and reporting will work. Joint workshops often reduce concerns and help define clear guardrails on visibility, retention and AI use.
How can we measure ROI of competency management software?
ROI rarely comes from license savings. Instead, look at talent outcomes: higher internal fill rates for open roles, reduced time-to-competence for new hires, fewer “surprise” skill gaps in critical areas, better retention of key experts and lower spend on external recruiting. You can also quantify time saved for HR and managers compared to manual skill matrices or fragmented tools. Over 2–3 years, these effects usually outweigh implementation and licence costs.
Jürgen Ulbrich
Jürgen Ulbrich has more than a decade of experience in developing and leading high-performing teams and companies. As an expert in employee referral programs as well as feedback and performance processes, Jürgen has helped over 100 organizations optimize their talent acquisition and development strategies.
