Navigating the Shift to Skills-Based Talent Management: Evidence-Based Strategies for Organizational Success

Listen to this article:

Abstract: Organizations are increasingly moving away from traditional job-based hiring and development models toward skills-based talent management approaches. This shift reflects changing workforce expectations, technological disruption, and the need for organizational agility in volatile business environments. This article examines the organizational and individual consequences of adopting skills-based frameworks, drawing on research in organizational psychology, human resource management, and change management. Evidence suggests that skills-based approaches can improve talent mobility, development effectiveness, and organizational adaptability when implemented thoughtfully. The article presents evidence-based interventions including transparent skills frameworks, internal mobility infrastructure, capability-building investments, and technology-enabled talent systems. Three pillars for long-term success are explored: psychological contract recalibration, distributed talent stewardship, and continuous learning ecosystems. Practitioners will find actionable guidance for navigating this transition while maintaining trust and performance.

The relationship between employers and employees is undergoing a fundamental recalibration. For decades, the employment compact centered on job titles, hierarchical advancement, and role-based stability. Today, organizations face a confluence of forces—rapid technological change, evolving employee expectations, demographic shifts, and business model disruption—that are rendering traditional job-based talent systems increasingly inadequate (Jain, 2025).

The concept of skills-based talent management has emerged as a response to these pressures. Rather than organizing talent around fixed job descriptions, skills-based approaches emphasize the capabilities individuals possess and can develop. This shift promises greater agility, more efficient talent deployment, and enhanced employee development. Research suggests that organizations adopting skills-based frameworks report improvements in talent mobility and development outcomes, though implementation challenges remain significant (Allen et al., 2010).

Yet this transition carries substantial risks. When organizations reshape their talent systems without adequate transparency, support, or trust-building, employees may experience the change as a betrayal of prior commitments. The psychological contract—the unwritten set of reciprocal expectations between employer and employee—becomes vulnerable (Rousseau, 1995). Without careful management, skills-based initiatives can trigger talent loss, disengagement, and performance declines rather than the promised benefits.

This article examines both the opportunities and risks inherent in the shift to skills-based talent management. It synthesizes research evidence with organizational examples to provide practitioners with frameworks for navigating this transition effectively. The stakes are high: organizations that manage this shift well can build more adaptable, engaged workforces; those that mishandle it risk damaging trust and losing critical talent precisely when they need it most.

The Talent Management Transformation Landscape

Defining Skills-Based Talent Management

Skills-based talent management represents a departure from traditional job-centric organizational models. In conventional systems, jobs serve as the primary unit of analysis—organizations create job descriptions, hire people to fill specific roles, and evaluate performance against job-specific criteria. Career progression typically follows vertical paths within functional silos.

Skills-based approaches, by contrast, organize talent around discrete capabilities. A skills-based system identifies the specific competencies individuals possess—both technical skills (e.g., data analysis, software development, regulatory compliance) and human skills (e.g., relationship building, complex problem-solving, adaptive communication). These skills become the currency for matching people to work, planning development, and enabling mobility across the organization.

The distinction matters because it fundamentally changes how organizations think about talent deployment. Rather than asking "Do we have someone in a business analyst role who can take this project?" a skills-based system asks "Who has the analytical, stakeholder management, and domain expertise capabilities this project requires?" The same individual might contribute to multiple projects requiring different skill combinations, transcending traditional role boundaries.

This flexibility addresses a core challenge organizations face: the half-life of job-specific skills continues to shrink while the time required to recruit, hire, and onboard external talent remains substantial. Skills-based systems aim to unlock latent capability within existing workforces, enabling faster, more cost-effective responses to changing business needs.

Current State of Practice and Adoption Drivers

The shift toward skills-based talent management reflects multiple converging pressures. Technology continues to reshape work at an accelerating pace, with automation, artificial intelligence, and digital platforms fundamentally altering required capabilities across industries. Organizations find that yesterday's job descriptions poorly match today's work requirements, creating a persistent gap between available and needed skills.

Employee expectations have evolved significantly, particularly among younger workforce cohorts. Many professionals now prioritize learning, development, and career mobility over tenure in a single role or even a single organization. The traditional compact—loyalty in exchange for job security—has given way to a more transactional relationship where individuals expect continuous skill development as part of the employment value proposition (Rousseau, 1995).

Demographic trends compound these challenges. As experienced workers retire, organizations face potential knowledge loss precisely when the complexity and pace of business demands are increasing. Simultaneously, talent competition has intensified, with skills shortages reported across technical, professional, and skilled trades occupations in many economies.

Industry examples illustrate this landscape. Technology companies have moved toward skills-based frameworks to enable rapid team formation around emerging products and services. Healthcare organizations are exploring skills-based approaches to optimize clinical workforce deployment amid persistent shortages. Professional services firms are implementing skills inventories to improve project staffing and client service delivery. Manufacturing companies are using skills frameworks to support workforce transitions as production processes become more automated and digitally integrated.

The adoption of skills-based approaches varies considerably by sector, organization size, and maturity. Some organizations have implemented comprehensive skills frameworks supported by sophisticated technology platforms. Others are taking more incremental approaches, beginning with skills assessments in specific departments or for particular talent segments. The unifying theme is a recognition that traditional job-based systems are increasingly misaligned with business needs and workforce realities.

Organizational and Individual Consequences of Skills-Based Transitions

Organizational Performance Impacts

Research and organizational experience suggest that well-implemented skills-based talent systems can deliver meaningful performance benefits, though outcomes vary based on implementation quality and organizational context.

Internal talent mobility often improves when organizations can match people to opportunities based on skills rather than job titles. Organizations report that employees who make internal moves based on skill matches tend to show higher performance and longer tenure than those hired externally for similar positions, though specific outcomes depend on the quality of the matching process and support provided during transitions (Allen et al., 2010).

Time-to-productivity for new projects or initiatives can decrease when organizations can quickly identify and deploy individuals with relevant existing capabilities rather than recruiting externally. This benefit is particularly valuable in fast-moving competitive environments where speed of execution provides strategic advantage.

Development efficiency may improve when learning investments align with specific skill gaps rather than generic role-based training programs. Skills frameworks enable more targeted development planning, potentially improving return on learning investments. However, this benefit depends on the accuracy of skills assessments and the quality of available development resources.

Workforce cost optimization can result from better utilization of existing talent, reduced external hiring, and more efficient allocation of training budgets. Organizations that effectively redeploy internal talent based on skills may reduce recruiting costs and improve workforce productivity.

Yet these potential benefits come with implementation challenges that can undermine performance if not managed carefully. Skills frameworks require significant investment in assessment infrastructure, technology systems, and ongoing maintenance. Organizations that implement skills-based systems without adequate process discipline or data quality may simply add complexity without realizing benefits.

Individual Wellbeing and Career Impacts

The shift to skills-based talent management creates both opportunities and risks for individual employees, with outcomes largely dependent on how organizations manage the transition.

Career clarity represents a central challenge. Traditional career paths, while sometimes limiting, provided clear expectations about progression. Skills-based systems can create ambiguity about how careers develop, what skills to prioritize for advancement, and how to navigate opportunities. Employees who previously understood their career trajectory may feel unmoored without adequate communication and guidance.

Development opportunity often increases in skills-based systems, as individuals can pursue learning aligned with their interests and the organization's needs rather than being constrained by their current job description. This flexibility can enhance engagement and career satisfaction when accompanied by genuine access to skill-building opportunities and supportive management.

Job security perceptions may be affected in complex ways. Some employees appreciate that skills-based systems make their capabilities more visible and transferable. Others worry that increased transparency about skills could make them vulnerable if their capabilities are deemed less critical or abundant. The psychological impact depends significantly on organizational communication about the purpose and implications of skills-based approaches.

Equity concerns emerge around who benefits from skills-based mobility and development opportunities. Without careful design, skills-based systems can perpetuate or even amplify existing biases. For example, employees with strong networks or high visibility may gain access to attractive skill-building opportunities while others are overlooked, regardless of potential. Organizations must actively design for equitable access to ensure skills-based systems don't disadvantage already marginalized groups (Bohnet, 2016).

The emotional dimensions of this transition shouldn't be underestimated. When organizations shift from job-based to skills-based systems without adequate explanation and support, employees may experience it as a unilateral change to their employment relationship. The sense that "the rules have changed" can trigger anxiety, erode trust, and prompt talented individuals to seek more stable situations elsewhere—the opposite of intended outcomes.

Evidence-Based Organizational Responses

Transparent Communication and Expectation Setting

The foundation for successful skills-based transitions is honest, ongoing communication about what's changing, why, and what it means for employees. Research on organizational change consistently demonstrates that perceived procedural justice—the fairness of processes used to make decisions—significantly influences employee reactions to change (Rousseau, 1995).

Effective communication strategies include:

• Explicit acknowledgment of the change: Leaders should clearly state that the organization is shifting how it thinks about talent and careers, rather than implementing the change quietly and leaving employees to interpret signals

• Business case explanation: Connecting the skills-based approach to specific organizational challenges (e.g., changing customer needs, technology shifts, competitive pressures) helps employees understand the rationale beyond HR process optimization

• Honest discussion of implications: Addressing both opportunities (greater mobility, targeted development) and challenges (career path ambiguity, need for continuous learning) builds credibility

• Regular updates and forums for questions: Creating ongoing dialogue rather than one-time announcements allows concerns to surface and be addressed

• Visible leadership commitment: When senior leaders discuss their own skill development and participate in skills-based initiatives, it signals genuine organizational priority

Several organizations have found that early, transparent communication—even when all details aren't yet finalized—produces better outcomes than delayed communication after systems are fully built. Employees appreciate being brought into the journey rather than presented with finished changes.

One professional services firm initiated their skills-based transition by hosting firm-wide sessions where leaders explained competitive pressures requiring greater workforce agility. They acknowledged that traditional career paths were changing and outlined plans to support employees through the transition. This upfront transparency helped frame subsequent changes as collaborative adaptation rather than unilateral imposition.

Building Robust Skills Assessment and Visibility Infrastructure

Skills-based systems require accurate, current information about what capabilities individuals possess. Without reliable skills data, the promised benefits of better matching and development evaporate. Yet skills assessment presents methodological challenges that organizations must address thoughtfully.

Effective approaches to skills visibility include:

• Multiple assessment methods: Combining self-assessments, manager validations, peer inputs, and work artifacts provides more complete and accurate skills profiles than any single method. Self-assessments alone tend toward both over- and under-estimation; manager assessments can reflect biases; multi-source approaches balance these limitations

• Clear proficiency definitions: Establishing what "intermediate" or "advanced" capability means for specific skills enables more consistent assessments. Vague proficiency descriptions undermine data quality and fairness

• Regular update mechanisms: Skills data becomes stale quickly. Systems that rely on annual reviews fail to capture recent skill development. More frequent, lightweight update processes maintain data currency

• Privacy and consent considerations: Employees should understand how their skills data will be used, who has access, and how it might affect their opportunities. Transparent data governance builds trust in the system

• Technology enablement: Skills platforms can facilitate assessment, search, and matching, but technology should support well-designed processes rather than drive them. Starting with process design and using technology to scale effective practices produces better outcomes than implementing tools without clear processes

A healthcare system implemented skills profiles for clinical staff to improve workforce deployment across facilities. They used structured self-assessments verified by unit managers, with clear proficiency criteria for each clinical skill. Importantly, they communicated that skills profiles would be used for development planning and opportunity matching, not for compensation or termination decisions. This clarity about purpose increased participation and data quality.

A manufacturing company created skills passports for production employees, documenting certifications, equipment proficiencies, and specialized capabilities. They used these passports to identify cross-training opportunities and optimize workforce scheduling. Employees appreciated the portable record of their capabilities, particularly as it increased their visibility for advancement opportunities.

Investing in Capability Building and Development Infrastructure

Skills-based systems create expectations for continuous learning and development. Organizations that implement skills frameworks without corresponding learning infrastructure risk employee cynicism and disengagement. Genuine investment in capability building is essential for credibility and outcomes.

Evidence-based development approaches include:

• On-demand learning resources: Curated libraries of digital learning content, accessible when employees identify skill gaps or opportunities, enable self-directed development. Quality and relevance matter more than volume

• Structured skill-building experiences: Rotational assignments, project-based learning, stretch assignments, and mentoring provide context-rich development that often produces deeper capability than courses alone (Knowles et al., 2015)

• Time allocation for learning: Explicit policies allowing work time for skill development signal that learning is genuinely valued rather than expected to occur during personal time

• Learning pathways and guidance: Particularly for complex skills, clear guidance about development sequencing helps employees navigate their learning journey. Suggesting that someone develop "strategic thinking" without indicating concrete steps is unhelpful

• Manager capability for development conversations: Equipping managers to have meaningful skill development discussions improves the quality of development planning. Many managers lack experience facilitating these conversations and benefit from training and tools

• Recognition and reinforcement: Celebrating skill development milestones, incorporating development into performance discussions, and creating visible stories of skill-based career progression reinforce the priority placed on learning

A technology company created a skills academy offering both digital courses and hands-on project opportunities aligned with their skills framework. Employees could use up to 10% of their time for skill development, with manager approval focused on ensuring business coverage rather than questioning the value of learning. The company tracked participation and found that employees who engaged with the skills academy showed higher retention rates than those who didn't, suggesting the development investment strengthened employment relationships.

A financial services firm implemented a mentoring network specifically for skill development. Employees could request mentors with particular expertise, and the firm recognized mentor contributions in performance evaluations. This formalized knowledge transfer while building connections across organizational silos.

Creating Internal Mobility and Opportunity Marketplace Systems

Skills-based talent management promises greater internal mobility, but this requires deliberate design of systems that surface opportunities and facilitate moves. Without infrastructure to enable mobility, skills frameworks become primarily administrative exercises.

Effective internal mobility systems incorporate:

• Opportunity visibility: Internal talent marketplaces, project postings, short-term assignment opportunities, and job openings should be accessible to all employees who meet baseline qualifications. Limiting visibility to select groups undermines trust and constrains talent flow

• Skills-based matching: Search and recommendation algorithms that connect employee skills profiles with opportunity requirements can surface non-obvious matches. An employee in finance might have customer analytics skills valuable to a marketing initiative, but without skills-based matching this potential contribution remains invisible

• Manager incentives for talent sharing: When managers are evaluated primarily on their team's performance without credit for developing talent who move elsewhere, they have disincentives to support mobility. Recognition systems should reward managers who develop people and enable their growth, even when it means losing team members

• Transition support: Employees moving to new roles based on partial skill matches need onboarding, training, and reasonable ramp-up time. Organizations that expect immediate full performance from internal movers create conditions for failure

• Fair access and transparency: Clear criteria for opportunity selection, visible processes, and feedback for unsuccessful candidates support perceptions of fairness. Opacity breeds suspicion that opportunities go to favored individuals regardless of stated skills-based criteria (Bohnet, 2016)

A consumer goods company launched an internal talent marketplace where employees could browse project opportunities, propose how their skills fit requirements, and commit specific time percentages. Project leaders could review proposals and select contributors. The company found this increased cross-functional collaboration and exposed high-potential employees to diverse experiences. Importantly, they tracked participation patterns to ensure access wasn't concentrated among already-advantaged groups.

A pharmaceutical organization created a rotational program where employees could take 3-6 month assignments in different functions to build new skills. They maintained employees' home positions during rotations and provided mentoring to support integration into temporary teams. Participants reported high satisfaction, and the company observed that rotation alumni often identified process improvement opportunities because they understood multiple parts of the organization.

Maintaining Compensation Equity and Market Competitiveness

Skills-based talent systems raise complex compensation questions. If career progression depends on skills rather than promotions through job levels, how should compensation evolve? Organizations must address these questions explicitly to maintain employee trust and market competitiveness.

Compensation considerations in skills-based environments include:

• Skills-based pay for some roles: Certain technical and specialized roles lend themselves to compensation based on verified skill proficiencies rather than job titles. Employees gain pay increases as they demonstrate new skills, even without job changes. This works best when skill definitions are clear and assessment is rigorous

• Maintaining market competitiveness: Skills-based systems should enable competitive pay by ensuring employees with highly valued, scarce skills receive appropriate compensation regardless of their job title or tenure. This may require adjusting traditional pay structures

• Transparency about compensation philosophy: Explaining how skills relate to compensation—even if that relationship is indirect—reduces anxiety and speculation. If the organization maintains job-based pay while using skills for development and mobility, stating that clearly prevents confusion

• Addressing lateral mobility: When employees move laterally to build new skills, compensation implications should be clear. If lateral moves mean pay freezes or reductions, mobility will be limited. Some organizations guarantee pay maintenance for lateral moves to encourage skill development

• Geographic and market adjustments: Skills-based pay shouldn't ignore labor market realities. An employee with certain skills may command different compensation in different locations or industries. Balancing internal equity with external competitiveness requires ongoing attention

A technology company implemented skills-based pay for engineering roles, with clear proficiency levels tied to compensation ranges for critical technical capabilities. Engineers could increase compensation by demonstrating advanced skills without changing roles or becoming managers. The company found this supported retention of technical specialists who previously would have needed to move into management for career progression.

An energy company maintained traditional job-based compensation but explicitly communicated that lateral moves to build skills would include minimum pay maintenance and, in some cases, skill development stipends. This policy encouraged employees to pursue growth opportunities without financial penalty.

Building Long-Term Skills-Based Organizational Capability

Recalibrating the Psychological Contract

The shift to skills-based talent management requires fundamental renegotiation of the psychological contract between employers and employees. Research demonstrates that psychological contracts—the unwritten, perceived mutual obligations in employment relationships—significantly influence employee commitment, performance, and retention (Rousseau, 1995). When organizations change talent systems without attending to psychological contract implications, they risk contract breach perceptions that damage relationships.

The traditional psychological contract in many industries implied job security and predictable career progression in exchange for employee loyalty and adequate performance. Skills-based systems implicitly propose a different contract: continuous skill development and mobility opportunity in exchange for employee adaptability and self-directed learning. This shift must be made explicit and negotiated, not assumed.

Elements of effective psychological contract recalibration include:

• Explicit new commitments: Organizations should articulate what they will provide in skills-based environments (e.g., learning resources, opportunity visibility, development time, skill-based advancement possibilities)

• Acknowledged trade-offs: Honest discussion of what's changing helps employees make informed decisions about their future with the organization. If career paths are becoming less predictable, say so while explaining what's replacing that predictability

• Individual choice: Where possible, allowing employees some control over their participation in skills-based mobility and development respects autonomy and reduces perceptions of imposed change

• Demonstrated follow-through: The new psychological contract becomes credible only when organizations deliver on commitments. If promised development resources don't materialize or mobility opportunities remain restricted, employees conclude the "new deal" is rhetorical rather than real

Organizations that successfully recalibrate psychological contracts invest time in dialogue—through skip-level conversations, focus groups, surveys, and forums—to understand how employees perceive proposed changes and what concerns require addressing. This engagement process itself signals respect for the employment relationship and increases buy-in for the transition.

Developing Distributed Skills Stewardship

Sustainable skills-based talent management requires shared responsibility rather than centralized HR control. While HR typically designs frameworks and systems, effective implementation depends on managers, employees, and senior leaders all playing active roles in skills development and deployment.

Distributed stewardship models incorporate:

• Manager capability and accountability: Managers should be equipped to have meaningful skills conversations, identify development opportunities, and make talent decisions based on skills rather than favoritism or convenience. This requires training, tools, and performance expectations that include talent development responsibilities

• Employee agency and self-management: Individuals should take ownership of their skills development and career navigation, with organizational support. Employee-driven development produces better engagement and outcomes than paternalistic approaches, though it requires accessibility to opportunities for all employees regardless of background (Knowles et al., 2015)

• Senior leader modeling: When executives discuss their own skill development, participate in learning programs, and make visible career moves based on skill building, it legitimizes these behaviors throughout the organization

• Cross-functional governance: Skills frameworks benefit from input across business units, ensuring that identified skills align with actual work requirements and that development resources address genuine capability gaps

• Community and peer support: Learning communities, skill-specific networks, and peer mentoring distribute knowledge sharing and reduce dependence on formal training programs

A healthcare organization created skills champions in each department—employees who understood the skills framework deeply and could support colleagues in skills assessment and development planning. This distributed support network made skills-based approaches more accessible while reducing burden on HR and management.

A financial services firm established a cross-functional skills council with representatives from major business lines, HR, and learning functions. The council reviewed the relevance of identified skills quarterly, recommended additions or modifications, and ensured development resources addressed priority skill gaps. This governance model maintained skills framework currency and business alignment.

Creating Continuous Learning Ecosystems

Long-term success with skills-based talent management requires embedding continuous learning into organizational culture and operations. Episodic training events and annual development planning are insufficient when skills requirements evolve constantly and employees must adapt throughout their careers.

Characteristics of effective continuous learning ecosystems include:

• Learning integrated with work: The most powerful development occurs through meaningful work experiences supplemented by targeted formal learning. Organizations that create stretch assignments, cross-functional projects, and problem-solving opportunities provide rich development contexts

• Accessible resources and time: Learning ecosystems fail if employees lack time for development or access to quality resources. Successful organizations explicitly allocate time for learning and curate relevant, high-quality content

• Psychological safety for experimentation: Continuous learning requires trying new approaches, which necessarily involves mistakes and imperfect early performance. Organizational cultures that punish failure inhibit learning; those that normalize experimentation as part of development enable it

• Knowledge capture and sharing: As employees develop expertise, mechanisms for sharing that knowledge amplify organizational capability. Communities of practice, documentation systems, and teaching opportunities spread learning beyond individuals

• Metrics and celebration: What gets measured gets managed. Tracking learning participation, skill development velocity, and capability deployment signals organizational priorities. Celebrating learning achievements reinforces the cultural message that development matters

An industrial company created "learning sprints"—focused two-week periods quarterly where teams could dedicate 20% of their time to skill development related to strategic priorities. This rhythm created predictable space for learning while maintaining business continuity. The company tracked participation and showcased projects emerging from learning sprints in leadership meetings.

A professional services firm implemented a "teach to learn" model where employees who developed new skills were expected to create a brief knowledge-sharing session for colleagues. This expectation deepened individual learning (teaching requires synthesis and clarity) while spreading knowledge efficiently across the organization.

Conclusion

The shift to skills-based talent management represents both significant opportunity and substantial risk for organizations. When implemented thoughtfully, skills-based approaches can improve workforce agility, enhance employee development, and create more efficient talent deployment. Yet the transition challenges the fundamental employment relationship, requiring careful attention to trust, transparency, and genuine support for employee adaptation.

Evidence and practice suggest several critical success factors for organizations navigating this transition:

Transparency and communication form the foundation. Organizations must clearly articulate what's changing, why, and what it means for individuals. Ambiguity and opacity breed anxiety and suspicion; honesty and ongoing dialogue build the trust necessary for successful change.

Infrastructure and investment separate meaningful skills-based systems from rhetorical commitments. Robust skills assessment, quality learning resources, functional internal mobility mechanisms, and fair compensation approaches require sustained organizational investment. Without this infrastructure, skills frameworks become administrative burdens rather than strategic enablers.

Distributed responsibility ensures sustainability. While HR typically designs skills frameworks, effective implementation requires active participation from managers, employees, and senior leaders. Capability building across these stakeholders and accountability for their respective roles in the skills ecosystem are essential.

Equity and inclusion must be designed into skills-based systems, not assumed. Without deliberate attention to equitable access, these systems can perpetuate or amplify existing biases and disadvantages. Fair processes, diverse opportunity visibility, and monitoring for disparate impacts protect against this risk (Bohnet, 2016).

Psychological contract recalibration acknowledges that this transition fundamentally changes employment relationships. Organizations that ignore psychological contract implications risk breach perceptions that damage trust and trigger talent loss. Explicit discussion, genuine choice where possible, and demonstrated follow-through on new commitments are essential.

For practitioners leading skills-based transformations, the imperative is clear: execute with transparency, invest meaningfully in supporting infrastructure, maintain focus on employee experience alongside organizational efficiency, and recognize this as a multi-year journey requiring sustained commitment and adaptation. Organizations that approach skills-based talent management as a collaborative evolution of the employment relationship position themselves for success; those that treat it as a unilateral efficiency initiative risk undermining the trust and engagement upon which all talent systems ultimately depend.

The future of work increasingly requires organizational and individual adaptability. Skills-based talent management, when implemented with care and genuine employee support, offers a framework for building that adaptability while maintaining the human dimensions of work that drive engagement, innovation, and performance.

References

1. Allen, D. G., Bryant, P. C., & Vardaman, J. M. (2010). Retaining talent: Replacing misconceptions with evidence-based strategies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(2), 48–64.

2. Bohnet, I. (2016). What works: Gender equality by design. Harvard University Press.

3. Jain, S. (2025, May 14). Skills-based hiring vs. traditional job descriptions: Adapting to the future. Forbes.

4. Knowles, M. S., Holton III, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (8th ed.). Routledge.

5. Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. SAGE Publications.

---

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Associate Dean and Director of HR Programs (WGU); Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD/HR/Leadership Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.

---

Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2025). Navigating the Shift to Skills-Based Talent Management: Evidence-Based Strategies for Organizational Success. Human Capital Leadership Review, 28(4). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.28.4.7