91福利

Uncertainties around Skills

Demonstrating simultaneous significance and uncertainty around skills, Dr Hollie Chandler, Director of Policy at the , shares that 鈥榮kills鈥� are mentioned over 400 times in the recent government white paper yet, coincidentally, remain undefined. Further, rapid advancements in AI and other communication technologies are changing the nature of many occupations. Well-established occupations 鈥� from farming to finance 鈥� are adapting to these mass shifts to optimise their performance and delivery, while skills-based experiences through education and training remain rooted in traditional understandings of the occupations and often do not reflect this rapid digital change. Cumulatively, this can misalign (prospective) employers and employees and, as the skills gap grows, this leaves people underprepared in a landscape of labour precarity. In response to this crisis and longstanding ambiguity around occupational requirements, the Skills Classification offers a hierarchical framework and lists of standardised skills, knowledge and tasks needed across diverse sectors in the UK.

Phil Smith CBE, Chair of Skills England, advocates adoption of the Skills Classification as a forward-looking tool that 鈥�helps people navigate their own pathways鈥�. By standardising skills language and offering 鈥� a free online tool for mapping skills 鈥� it supports occupational development through clarity, consistency and accessibility. Through 22 skill domains, 106 skill areas, 607 skill groups, 3,350 occupational skills comprising 13 core skills and 5,056 knowledge categories, and 22,583 occupational tasks, the Skills Classification has potential for significant impact for users of diverse backgrounds.

The Need for a Skills Framework

To illustrate the need for, and purpose of, the Skills Classification, Claire Tunley, CEO of , uses a simple analogy: cake. She explains that occupational titles 鈥� despite being aligned to industry-benchmarked 鈥� can function as broad, sometimes imprecise labels. When employers state they want 鈥渃ake鈥� 鈥� for instance, a Data Analyst 鈥� the job title and loosely defined skillset may elicit gaps between individuals鈥� training and experience and employers鈥� needs. As Tunley points out, many things qualify as cake 鈥� a Victoria sponge, a vanilla traybake or chocolate lava cake 鈥� but missing clarity on ingredients, flavours or occasions can leave expectations and needs unmet. This ambiguity is best presented by the Jaffa Cake, whose biscuit-like exterior has long sparked debates over its status as a 鈥� despite manufacturers confirming it is, indeed, a cake. The point, Tunley argues, is that asking for 鈥渃ake鈥� is not sufficient. What matters is specifying the unique medley of 鈥渋ngredients鈥�.

In this regard, clear articulation of required skills 鈥� and their intended function 鈥� can better support individuals and organisations alike. To elaborate, beyond technical skills such as programming languages or tech stacks, different combinations of skills could distinguish a Data Analyst from a Data Engineer or Data Scientist. Equally, transferable or soft skills such as learning and investigating or numeracy may position someone for roles as varied as a Senior Officer in HM Revenue & Customs or a Sales Director. As Professor Elias states, 鈥�We are providing a classification which is both flexible and robust.鈥�

For instance, Tunley notes around 70% of FSSC employees have voluntarily engaged in active skills learning and development within the last 6 months. This demonstrates not only the individual level responses to the dynamic labour market and the organisational benefits this can bring for employers, but also the facilitative nature of the Skills Classification and its capacity to nurture positive impact for multifaceted beneficiaries and users.