What counts as a skill? Comparing eight major skills taxonomies

Abstract

Over the past decade, multiple major skills taxonomies have been developed or revamped, each presented by its developers as a ‘common language’ for skills. Despite this shared purpose, the taxonomies differ at two levels: in what each defines a skill to be, and in which skills each contains and how they are described. The result adds to the confusion rather than alleviating it. This impacts young people, who are asked to name their skills to employers yet struggle to do so. This study profiles eight major skills frameworks to identify how skill is defined within the documents, and which core skills are identified. Document analysis of the released files and method documents for eight skill taxonomies against a template covering purpose, method, structure, coverage, and definition, combined with reflexive thematic analysis of the core skills named within the taxonomies. The frameworks use common sources and share a dual-layer structure separating core from technical skills; construction methods combine expert, industry, and AI/ML approaches, and method shapes the hierarchy. At the level of the concept, the frameworks differ in whether and how each defines skill, and in where each places attributes and attitudes. At the level of the named skills, they largely agree: the same 12 core skills recur, described in similar terms under different titles. Skills taxonomies hold potential to improve access to, and clarity over, the labour market. Using familiar language for skills, sharing descriptions with other taxonomies, and allowing individuals to see and choose from alternative titles could improve usability.