Filled example: sponsor interview
Fictional answers from the customer support team lead who asked for “returns training”.
| Question | Sample answer |
|---|---|
| What should people do differently, and in which task? | Issue refunds under the new returns policy and code the reason correctly. |
| What happens now, and how do you know? | Some agents still apply the old 14-day rule. The October refund audit found 9 errors in 40 refunds. |
| What is the cost or risk of leaving it? | Customers receive the wrong amount, which leads to repeat contacts and manual corrections by finance. |
| Who does this task, how many people and how often? | 14 agents, several refunds each per day. |
| What has already been tried? | One email announcing the change. No practice and no job aid. |
| What else could explain it? | The old policy page still appears first in the knowledge base search. |
| What result in 60 days would show this worked? | Refund errors in the monthly audit fall from 9 in 40 to 2 or fewer. |
Filled example: skill-gap matrix
Levels 1–5, impact and frequency 1–3. Score = Gap × Impact × Freq.
| Task or skill | Evidence of the current level | Need | Now | Gap | Impact | Freq. | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Issue a refund under the new returns policy | Audit of 40 recent refunds: 9 used the old policy | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 18 |
| Record the correct refund reason code | Monthly report: 30% of refunds coded “Other” | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 12 |
| Find the current policy page | Search log: the old policy page still appears first | 4 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 |
| Explain the returns window to a customer | Call review of 12 calls: 10 explained it correctly | 4 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 |
| Escalate a damaged-goods claim | Team lead notes: escalation form often incomplete | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
Filled example: decisions
| Rank | Need | Response | Owner and date | Measure in 60 days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Issue a refund under the new policy (score 18) | 45-minute practice session with five realistic cases, plus a one-page job aid | Trainer, 14 November | Refund errors in the monthly audit |
| 2 | Record the correct reason code (score 12) | Add the code list to the job aid and check it in the practice cases | Trainer, 14 November | Share of refunds coded “Other” |
| — | Find the current policy page | Archive the old page. No training. | Knowledge base owner, 3 November | Old page no longer appears in search |
Is training the right answer?
Check each cause against the evidence before you design a course. More than one cause can apply.
| Possible cause | What you might see | Better first response |
|---|---|---|
| Skill or knowledge gap | People cannot do the task correctly even when they have time, tools and clear instructions. | Training or practice with feedback. |
| Unclear expectation | People do the task differently because nobody agreed the standard. | Write and share the standard; then check. |
| Tool or process barrier | The system, form or process makes the correct action slow or impossible. | Fix the tool or process. |
| Missing or outdated information | People follow old guidance or cannot find the current version. | Update and remove old sources. |
| Rare task | People did it correctly once but forget between occurrences. | A job aid or checklist at the point of use. |
| Competing priorities or workload | People know how but have no time, or other targets reward something else. | Discuss with the manager; training will not change it. |
How the priority score calculates
| Column | What it means | Values |
|---|---|---|
| Need | The level the task requires in this role | 1–5 |
| Now | The current level, based on the evidence recorded | 1–5 |
| Gap | Need minus Now; zero if people already meet the need | 0–4 |
| Impact | Consequence of doing the task wrong: 1 minor, 2 noticeable, 3 serious | 1–3 |
| Freq. | How often the task happens: 1 monthly or less, 2 weekly, 3 daily | 1–3 |
| Score | Gap × Impact × Freq. A ranking aid for discussion, not a formal assessment | 0–36 |
Blank skill-gap matrix
Blank version. Use the Excel workbook to calculate the gap, score and rank automatically.
| Task or skill | Evidence of the current level | Need | Now | Gap | Impact | Freq. | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
What you'll leave with
The sponsor and trainer leave the meeting with a one-sentence performance problem, a list of causes that training cannot fix, a ranked skill-gap matrix based on evidence, and one agreed decision with an owner and a measure to check in 60 days.
Before the session
- For trainers, L&D staff and team leads who receive a request for training. The 60-minute meeting brings together the sponsor who asked for it and one to four people who do or supervise the work.
- Before the meeting, collect two or three pieces of existing evidence, such as error reports, quality checks, customer feedback or a sample of work. Ask the sponsor the interview questions in advance if time is short.
- Send the learner questions to three to five people who do the work. Keep answers anonymous and report them as a summary. Treat self-ratings as opinion, not as evidence of skill.
- Share the blank matrix in an accessible, editable format. Use the Excel version on screen if you meet online so the score and rank calculate as you type.
How to fill it in with your team
Confirm the performance problem
Use the sponsor interview. Ask what people should do differently, what they do now and how the sponsor knows. Write the problem in one sentence that names a task and a result, not a course title. If nobody can describe the current result, agree how to find out before continuing.
Check causes before choosing training
Walk through the cause check table. For each cause, ask for an example from the evidence. Record the causes that training cannot fix, such as a broken tool or unclear expectations, with an owner. Continue only with the tasks where a skill or knowledge gap is likely.
List the tasks that matter
Name four to eight tasks connected to the problem. Write each as something a person does, such as “issue a refund”, not a topic such as “returns”. Agree the required level for each task using the five-level scale.
Rate the current level with evidence
For each task, record the evidence first, then the current level. Use work samples, reports and observation before opinion. Add the learner answers as context. Where evidence is missing, mark the row “to check” and give it an owner instead of guessing a number.
Score and rank the gaps
Rate impact and frequency from 1 to 3. The score is the gap multiplied by impact and frequency. Sort by score, then check the top three against common sense: a high score with weak evidence needs checking before you design anything.
Agree the decision and next check
For the top one to three needs, choose a response: training, practice with feedback, a job aid, a process fix or no action. Record an owner, a date and one measure you will check in 60 days, such as the error rate in the same audit.
Participant worksheet
Copy this table into a document, or print the worksheet from the bundle. Share only what you choose.
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| The performance problem in one sentence | |
| Evidence that the problem is real | |
| Causes that training cannot fix, with owners | |
| Top-priority gap and its score | |
| Decision, owner and date | |
| Measure to check in 60 days |
Debrief questions
- Which part of the problem would remain even after perfect training?
- Which score rests on the weakest evidence, and how will you check it?
- What is the smallest response that could close the top gap?
Adapt it for your group
- With only the sponsor available, complete the interview and cause check in 20 minutes, then fill the matrix after you have collected evidence and learner answers.
- For a large or regulated programme, use the matrix for one role at a time and add a column for the source of each required level, such as a procedure or standard.
- Online, share the Excel workbook on screen so the score and rank calculate as people talk. Read each row aloud and accept typed contributions in chat.
- Keep individual names out of the matrix. It describes a role or group, not a person. Do not use it for performance ratings, pay or selection decisions.
After the session
Put the 60-day measure in the calendar with its owner. After the response, compare the same evidence source with the baseline you recorded, for example the next monthly audit. If the gap remains, return to the cause check before adding more training. File the completed template with the course design so the next trainer can see why the course exists.
Questions people ask
What should a training needs analysis include?
Include the performance problem, the evidence for it, the causes that training cannot fix, the tasks and required levels, the current levels with evidence, a way to prioritise the gaps, and a decision with an owner and a measure. This template covers each of these in one sheet or table.
How is a training needs analysis different from a skills matrix?
A skills matrix records levels for a team or a person over time. A training needs analysis starts from a specific problem and asks whether training is the right response. This kit uses a skill-gap matrix inside the analysis, together with the sponsor interview and the cause check.
How does the priority score work?
The score multiplies the gap (0–4) by impact (1–3) and frequency (1–3), so the maximum is 36. It is a ranking aid for discussion. Check the evidence behind a high score before you act on it.
Can I do a training needs analysis without a survey?
Yes. Existing evidence such as audits, quality checks and work samples is often more reliable than a survey. Short conversations with three to five people who do the work can replace the learner questionnaire.
Is this a formal competency assessment?
No. The template supports a decision about training for a role or group. It is not a validated assessment and should not be used to rate, pay or select individual employees.
What is included in the free and editable files?
The open PDF includes the sponsor interview, learner questions, blank and filled skill-gap matrix, prioritisation sheet, cause check and the 60-minute meeting plan. Subscribers also receive the editable Word file, an Excel workbook that calculates the gap, score and rank, and a CSV of the meeting plan.
How to use the files
Print the PDF, edit the Word file in Word or Google Docs, or open the CSV or XLSX in a spreadsheet. Open files need no email.
Can I use this with paying clients?
Yes. Use and adapt this original Superglue kit in your own training, including paid client sessions. Please share this page rather than redistributing the unmodified kit. Read the full usage terms.