In the rapidly evolving landscape of work, skills are the currency of success. Organisations need robust frameworks to effectively identify, organise, and leverage these skills.
Two key terms often thrown around in this context are skills taxonomy and skills ontology. While they may sound similar, their differences are significant and understanding these nuances can make or break your skill strategy.
Let’s explore what each term means, how they differ, and why mixing them can derail your organisation's talent goals.
What is a Skills Taxonomy?
A skills taxonomy is a structured, hierarchical classification of skills. Think of it as a catalogue or a dictionary that organises skills into categories and subcategories based on common characteristics.
For example:
Category: Digital Skills
Subcategories: Programming, Data Analysis, Cybersecurity
Taxonomies are relatively static and offer a high-level overview of skills relevant to an industry, organisation, or role. They provide consistency in language across your workforce, making aligning hiring, training, and development initiatives easier.
Organisations like the European Skills/Competences, Qualifications and Occupations (ESCO) framework and the Skills Framework for the Information Age (SFIA) use taxonomies to offer standardised references. They are especially useful in building job descriptions, competency frameworks, and compliance reporting.
What is a Skills Ontology?
A skills ontology, on the other hand, is a more dynamic and interconnected web of relationships between skills. It goes beyond categorisation to show how skills relate to one another, jobs, industries, and even the tools or qualifications required.
For instance, if your taxonomy lists "data analysis" as a skill, an ontology will map its connections to:
Tools: Excel, Python, Tableau
Related Skills: Data visualisation, statistical modelling
Jobs: Data Analyst, Business Intelligence Specialist
Learning Pathways: Online courses, certifications
An ontology offers a richer, contextual understanding of how skills interact in real-world settings. By integrating data and AI, ontologies can adapt over time, reflecting the emergence of new skills or changes in job requirements.
Key Differences Between Taxonomy and Ontology
Aspect | Skills Taxonomy | Skills Ontology |
Structure | Hierarchical | Networked and relational |
Complexity | Simple classification | Context-rich connections |
Adaptability | Relatively static | Dynamic, evolving with trends |
Application | Standardising language | Supporting complex decision-making |
Example Use Case | Writing job descriptions | Predicting future skills demands |
Why Mixing Them Up is a Risk to Your Skill Strategy
Misaligned InvestmentsTreating a taxonomy like an ontology can lead to underwhelming outcomes in talent planning. A taxonomy might tell you what skills are needed, but without the relational depth of an ontology, you miss insights into how those skills are acquired, applied, or evolved.
Limited Workforce InsightsIf your strategy relies solely on a taxonomy, you lack the context to identify skill adjacencies or transferable skills within your workforce. For example, you might overlook that an employee with "data entry" skills could transition into "data analysis" with minor upskilling.
Missed Opportunities for PersonalisationOntologies enable personalisation in learning and development by mapping tailored pathways for each employee. Without this, your training initiatives risk being generic and less effective, which can demotivate employees and waste resources.
Inability to Respond to ChangeIn fast-moving industries, relying on static taxonomies means you could miss emerging trends or fail to pivot quickly. Ontologies, with their adaptability, help you anticipate future skill demands and maintain a competitive edge.
The Case for Combining Both
A comprehensive skill strategy doesn’t pit taxonomies against ontologies—it uses both effectively.
Taxonomies provide the foundational structure, offering consistency and clarity. Ontologies build on this foundation, layering in complexity and adaptability to provide actionable insights.
Consider a scenario in talent acquisition: A taxonomy might help you define the skills required for a role, but an ontology can guide you in assessing candidates with transferable skills or identifying internal talent ready to transition into the role.
Want your People & Talent functions to be more effective and efficient? Clu’s TalentGPS™ is the AI plug-in that helps you unlock the power of skills-based hiring in your organisation.
We exist because 90% of applicant tracker systems initially filter candidates based on keywords, career dates, and previous job titles—none of which determine whether someone can do a job.
It’s time to get a Clu.