The Skillspeak Difference

Adopting the Skillspeak tool and methodology will bring your organisation the following exclusives:

  • You will unlock and gain value from latent staff talents
  • The system will reach an unprecedented level of user acceptance

Staff will support and embrace a skills management process, if they can see it is of direct benefit to them – and will not, if not.
Skillspeak can be seen by staff as a real way of accelerating careers, a direct agent to initiate personal development and a way to increase the probability of assignment to stimulating projects. It becomes a positive in maintaining full employment.
Note: A process not enjoying widespread user acceptance has little chance of success, regardless of the investments made. Could this describe your current system?

  • The ultimate in ease of use, plus a wide range of powerful functions

Incredibly easy and comfortable to use, the tool and methodology are based on sound principles, providing all information needed to support a complete solution, through coherent data and reports.

  • Real world solutions

The design of Skillspeak was driven from experiences of working with real problems and finding traditional solutions inadequate. Our consultants are real practitioners who have applied their rich experience over many years to the challenge of harnessing peoples’ talents to achieve direct business benefits. We know the real issues involved in unlocking and developing human capability and deploying resources based on a “best fit” goal.

Comparing solutions

How does your current Intellectual Capital Management system compare to Skillspeak?

Checklist Question

SkillSPeak Response

Is the system in existence and available for trials with real data? Yes
Are latent and/or tacit skills recorded and available for search? Yes
Do all staff have an opportunity to advise all additional skills held? Yes
Do users have the freedom to instantly add any skill to the dictionary? Yes
How much overhead (time) is needed to define a new skill? None. Instant addition.
Can skills be allocated a required level and relative importance? Yes
Are there specific benefits in evidence for individuals? Yes
Will user acceptance be a feature of the process? Yes
Are future roles surveyed to allow for forecasted skills needs to be identified? Yes
Are the functions designed to be easily used by HR Practitioners? Yes
Can staff have gap analyses performed for all potential roles in the organisation, including their own? Yes
Are reports available to show skills held in excess of requirements? Yes
Are candidate ranking reports available to assist with recruitment and succession planning? Yes
Does the design derive from personal experience in professional development and resource deployment? Yes
Can structured role data be handled? Yes
Does the process avoid common data taxonomy problems? Yes
Does the system learn to model the organisation as it changes over time? Yes E2?? uses heuristics