Are we chasing a false dawn? The skills movement might be the wrong bet

The skills movement is often hailed as the great transformative force of our generation—a revolution that will reshape work, unlock human potential, and future-proof organisations.

But what if we’ve got it all wrong?

What if skills aren’t the answer to the future of work, but just a more sophisticated way to categorise labour? What if we’re over-engineering a problem that people aren’t that interested in solving?

I don’t see workers rushing to document their skills in HR systems—most don’t even update their LinkedIn unless they’re actively job-hunting. I don’t see technology providers making skills truly interoperable—because why would they? The business model of walled gardens is far too profitable. I don’t see skills being anything more than a tool to match people to the tasks we already want them to do—a slightly more nuanced way to box people into predefined needs.

Some of this is already happening outside of so-called “skills-powered” systems. Businesses deploy people based on their perceived value, experience, and networks—whether their skills are logged in a database. The gig economy, internal talent marketplaces, and cross-functional project work all exist without needing an elaborate skills ontology. So why are we so convinced that “skills” are the holy grail of workforce transformation?

If skills alone aren’t the future, then what is?

🚀 Capability, not just skills. Knowing JavaScript doesn’t make you a great software engineer. Knowing how to lead doesn’t mean you can manage. Capability is more than just skills—it’s skills + experience + context. Instead of obsessing over skills taxonomies, we should be designing systems that measure and deploy actual capability.

🔀 Fluidity, not just matching. Skills-based systems assume that work is predictable—that we can predefine skills, match them to tasks, and optimise output. But real work doesn’t function like that. We should be investing in talent fluidity—how fast and effectively people can pivot, adapt, and apply themselves in new ways.

💡 Intelligence, not just data. Most skills initiatives are glorified data projects—gathering more inputs in the hope that something valuable emerges. But data without intelligence is useless. Instead of trying to get people to input more skills, we should be designing systems that infer, predict, and optimise human potential dynamically.

We’re not on the brink of a skills revolution. We’re on the edge of a recalibration—where businesses will start to realise that skills data alone won’t fix workforce challenges, won’t drive better hiring, and won’t magically make organisations agile.

The companies that win this battle won’t be the ones with the biggest skills databases. They’ll be the ones that build for real human potential—capability, adaptability, and intelligence.

So, are we chasing a false dawn with the skills movement? Maybe. But the real opportunity isn’t in organising skills—it’s in unleashing talent.