Competencies
Competency frameworks usually die in a spreadsheet because nothing uses them. In Spark.work the same definitions drive career paths, reviews and development plans, so the framework stays current because it is doing work.
Request a Demo
A central set of definitions instead of per-department copies that drift apart. Competencies are grouped into categories, written once, and mapped to the roles that need them, so the framework the HR team maintains is the same one a manager sees in a review and the same one a career path is built from. There is no second copy to keep in step.
Make progression explicit: what is expected of a person at each level of a path, written down once and visible to the people it applies to. The competency matrix is the grid behind that - roles down one axis, competencies across the other, and the proficiency expected in each cell. It is what turns not quite ready for senior into a conversation about three named competencies.
Where a person stands, using the same definitions everyone else is measured against. Assessment can come from the manager, from the individual, or from a 360 that collects input from the people who actually work with them. The result lands on a competency profile that sits with the rest of the employee record rather than in a separate assessment tool.
Once people are assessed against the same framework, the gaps stop being anecdotal. Compare the proficiency a role expects against the proficiency a team actually holds, by department, position or individual, and the picture is a report rather than an opinion. That is the input to a development plan for one person and to a hiring or training decision for a whole function.
A framework earns its keep in review and development conversations, not in an annual audit. Because the definitions are shared, a one-on-one can open on a named competency, a development plan can target it, and the next review cycle can check whether it moved. The framework stays current because something depends on it every month.
The same definitions can shape what you hire for, so internal and external standards match. A requisition can be written against the competencies the role expects, candidates can be assessed on them, and whoever joins is already positioned on the framework their first review will use - instead of being measured against one standard at interview and a different one six months later.
Competency management in Spark.work runs as one loop rather than a document. The library defines each competency and its proficiency levels; the matrix maps those competencies onto roles and levels; assessment - self, manager and 360 - places each person against that map; the gaps that fall out drive development plans, learning and career paths; and the next review cycle reads from the same definitions. Nothing is re-entered between those steps, which is the reason a framework survives its first year.
Built for mid-size organizations that have outgrown a competency spreadsheet but do not want a standalone skills tool bolted onto an HR system: HR teams maintaining a framework across several departments, managers who need to say what good looks like at the next level and mean something specific by it, and leadership that wants capability and headcount read from the same data. Spark.work is used by telecom, software and professional services companies, including Ucom, EasyDMARC and Volo.
Competencies
Competencies connect development, performance and hiring.
FAQ
Software for defining the skills and behaviours a role requires, setting expectations by level, and assessing people against them. In Spark.work those definitions are shared with career paths, reviews and development plans rather than kept separately, so the framework is maintained in one place and used everywhere.
A competency framework is the set of definitions - what each competency means and what each proficiency level looks like. A skills or competency matrix is the grid that maps those definitions onto roles and levels. You need the framework first; the matrix is how it is applied. Spark.work holds both, so the matrix is always built from the current definitions.
You build your own library, but it is built once and reused everywhere - matrix, profiles, reviews and career paths all reference the same definitions. Most organizations start with one department and extend from there, rather than defining every competency before anything goes live.
Through self-assessment, manager assessment, or a 360 that collects input from colleagues, depending on the competency and the cycle you run. The results land on the competency profile alongside the rest of the employee record, so one assessment can be compared with the previous one instead of standing alone.
360 reviews are competency-based, and performance assessment combines competency input with business results, so a review can reference the framework directly instead of restating it in different words.
Yes. Because everyone is assessed against the same definitions, the difference between the proficiency a role expects and the proficiency a team holds can be reported by department, position or individual. That gap report is what development plans and hiring decisions are built on.
Yes. Requisitions and candidate assessments can be written against the same library, so the standard a candidate is measured against at interview is the standard their first review will use.
