Aligning L&D Roadmaps to Skill Demand

Modern enterprises face a critical challenge: learning roadmaps often drift away from the business’s evolving skill needs. In fact, 80% of L&D teams fail to align training with business strategy, wasting budget on programs that don’t move the needleeducate360.com. To establish yourself as the go-to enterprise L&D leader, you must architect a “Learning Solution Architecture” function that tightly links learning plans to business capability demands. This playbook provides a cross-industry, actionable guide – with a focus on Canada (and insights from U.S. companies) – to build and run this function. We’ll cover forecasting skill gaps by role, prioritizing “build vs. buy” solutions, governance and intake processes, success metrics, a 90-day pilot plan, and real-world case studies of companies aligning development to strategy.

The Pain Point: When L&D Roadmaps Drift from Business Needs

Many organizations have experienced the scenario: the business shifts strategy or adopts new technology, but L&D continues executing an outdated training roadmap. The result is a skills mismatch – employees are trained, yet critical capability gaps remain unaddressed. Surveys confirm this disconnect: 58% of L&D leaders say closing skill gaps and aligning with future business needs is their top challengeblog.getaura.ai. Misalignment isn’t just an academic issue; it has tangible impacts. Employees may enjoy courses, but if those courses don’t target urgent skill needs, productivity flatlines and strategic goals slip out of reacheducate360.com.

Why does this drift happen? Often, training plans are formulated in isolation from business planning. Hidden assumptions (“any training is good training”) and outdated content further widen the gapeducate360.comeducate360.com. Meanwhile, the pace of change in most industries means skills quickly obsolesce – the average half-life of a skill is under five years (and for tech skills it’s as short as ~2.5 years)springboard.com. Without a system to continuously realign learning priorities, yesterday’s roadmap can’t meet today’s and tomorrow’s needs.

Solution Overview: A Learning Solution Architecture function is the answer to this problem. This dedicated function operates as an internal “learning strategy architect” for the business. It ensures training roadmaps are dynamically aligned to the skills the organization actually needs, now and in the future. Key responsibilities include: forecasting capability gaps, maintaining a skills development backlog (pipeline of learning initiatives) linked to business roadmaps, deciding which skills to develop internally versus acquire externally, and governing content lifecycle so learning assets stay fresh.

By implementing this function with executive support and a clear operating model, companies can transform L&D into a strategic partner. High-performing organizations treat training as “a strategic tool” essential for business goals rather than a checkboxeducate360.com. The result: learning investments yield measurable outcomes like faster innovation, higher customer satisfaction, and talent agility – elevating your brand as an L&D leader who delivers business value.

Establishing the Learning Solution Architecture Function

1. Secure Executive Sponsorship and Governance: Begin by getting buy-in at the top. Identify an executive sponsor (e.g. the CHRO or a business unit GM) who champions the skills agenda. Form a cross-functional governance team that includes L&D, business unit representatives, HR business partners, and Financeaspeninstitute.org. This team will ensure the learning architecture function stays aligned with strategic priorities (and has the budget/resources to execute). Schedule regular (e.g. quarterly) governance meetings to review progress on skill development initiatives and adjust to any strategy shiftsaspeninstitute.org. A strong governance framework prevents the function from becoming a “flavor of the month” – it cements upskilling as a long-term business priorityaspeninstitute.org.

2. Define the Operating Model and Roles: Design how the Learning Solution Architecture team will work day-to-day. Key elements of the operating model include:

• Engagement model with business leaders: For example, assign L&D “solution architects” to partner with each major business segment or function. These liaisons work with business leaders to understand upcoming projects, product launches, or transformations that will require new skills. Regular touchpoints (monthly or bi-monthly) keep a pulse on emerging needs.
• Intake and needs assessment process: Establish a standardized skills intake form or rubric for business stakeholders to request L&D support or identify skill gaps. The intake rubric should capture critical information: Which roles or teams are affected? What new capabilities are required and why (link to business objective)? How urgent is the need? What is the estimated audience size and impact? By using a consistent intake template, you can triage demands systematically. For instance, BMO Financial Group (a major bank in Canada) uses a learning intake checklist that asks business sponsors to articulate the performance gap and strategic importance before any solution design beginseducate360.com (hypothetical example illustrating best practice).
• Backlog management and triage: Treat the collected skill needs as a portfolio backlog. Much like an IT product backlog, not every requested training will be built immediately. Use a value/effort scoring to prioritize. For each proposed learning solution, estimate the business value or expected impact (e.g. will it close a critical compliance gap? drive revenue? improve customer experience?) and the effort to deliver (e.g. development complexity, cost, time). Plotting initiatives on a value vs. effort matrix helps identify “quick wins” (high value, low effort) to do first, and highlights which high-value but higher-effort programs need phased approaches. For example: One segment’s intake may reveal a need to train 50 sales reps on a new product (high value, relatively low effort using an existing training template), and a need to develop 5 senior data scientists (high value but very specialized – possibly a higher effort or a “buy” candidate). This triage ensures the team focuses on the skills with the highest strategic impact first.
• Resources and capabilities: Ensure you have the right team competencies. The Learning Architecture function may include learning experience designers, data analysts, and content curators. Some team members should be adept at data analysis (for skill gap analytics), while others excel at solution design and vendor management for external content. Define roles such as “Learning Solutions Architect,” “Skills Analyst,” or “Content Strategist,” with clear responsibilities for each. For instance, a Skills Analyst might own the skills inventory data and work with HRIS/analytics tools to identify internal skill profiles and gaps.
• Integration with HR processes: Align this function with talent management and workforce planning. The skills roadmap should feed into recruiting plans (so HR knows where to hire because upskilling alone won’t fill the gap) and performance management (so managers support development plans addressing noted gaps). Companies like Verizon illustrate this integration: Verizon created a new job architecture aligned to market skill taxonomies, giving leaders a clear view of talent supply versus demandgradsoflife.orggradsoflife.org. Verizon’s annual workforce planning now leverages these skill insights to define talent roadmaps, identifying what talent is in place and which skills are needed for future growthgradsoflife.org. Your operating model should enable similar alignment between learning roadmaps and broader HR strategy.

3. Forecasting Future Capability Gaps (by Segment/Role): The core of this function is proactive skills forecasting. Rather than reacting to requests, you’ll work with business leaders to anticipate the capabilities needed 12, 24, or 36 months out. Here’s how to do it:

• Collaborate on business roadmaps: For each business segment or role family, review the business’s 1-3 year roadmap. Ask pointed questions: What new products, services, or strategic initiatives are planned? Are we entering new markets or adopting new technologies? What roles will be critical for these, and do we have enough people proficient in the requisite skills? For example, a Canadian retail bank planning a digital platform launch might forecast a need for more AI and data analytics skills among its product and marketing teams. Engaging leaders in these conversations grounds your learning plan in actual business strategyeducate360.com.
• Use data to identify skill gaps: Augment leadership input with data. Leverage skill assessment tools and HR analytics to map current employee skills vs. needed skills. Many companies use self-assessments, manager assessments, or platforms (like Degreed, LinkedIn Learning, Workday Skills Cloud, etc.) to maintain a skills inventory. Identify gaps by segment: e.g., if “data literacy” is identified as a future-needed skill for all finance analysts, assess how many analysts today have that proficiency. This gap analysis can be quantified (e.g., 40% of finance staff need upskilling in data visualization).
• Outside-in labor market intelligence: Don’t rely only on internal data – the biggest “skills gap” problem is often visibilityblog.getaura.ai. Supplement your forecasting with external insights about emerging skills in your industry. For instance, track reports from the World Economic Forum or industry bodies on trending skills. According to one 2025 global report, companies must get better at spotting which new skills are gaining traction across their industry and which are fading, because relying solely on internal metrics leaves blind spotsblog.getaura.aiblog.getaura.ai. Consider using labor market analytics tools or consulting research: in other words, take an “outside-in” view to identify which roles and competencies are rising in demandblog.getaura.ai. A Canadian example: Bell Canada recognized cloud computing and cybersecurity as critical emerging domains; by looking outward at tech industry trends, they proactively invested in upskilling employees in cloud and digital skills, rather than waiting for a talent crisiscareerminds.ca.
• Segment the forecasting by role clusters: It’s impractical to forecast every micro-skill for every job. Group roles into capability segments. For example, segments might be: Technology & Engineering, Data & Analytics, Customer Service, Sales & Marketing, Leadership, etc. Within each, identify 5-10 key competencies that will be needed. This segmentation keeps the task manageable while still specific. As an illustration, forecasting for the Technology segment might highlight needs in cloud architecture, AI/ML, and DevSecOps, whereas the Sales segment might focus on digital sales tools, virtual selling skills, etc. Research suggests doing such forecasting at the job/role level is most actionable, even if you use broader industry trends as a starting pointengagerocket.coengagerocket.co.
• Methodology for forecasting: Combine quantitative and qualitative methodsengagerocket.co. Quantitative could include analyzing turnover data (are we losing people with key skills?), retirement projections (will expertise walk out the door?), and modeling scenarios (e.g., “if our data science needs grow 20%, how many people to upskill?”). Qualitative forecasting involves expert interviews and workshops – convene subject matter experts and strategists to envision future work. Some companies run “future of work” scenario sessions for each segment to brainstorm how roles might change, then backward-plan what development is needed. The EngageRocket L&D forecasting model suggests a structured process: get leadership buy-in that forecasting is necessaryengagerocket.co, gather inputs from multiple sources (business strategy, workforce data, external trends)engagerocket.co, analyze these to spot trendsengagerocket.co, and do this regularly (not a one-time event)engagerocket.coengagerocket.co. In practice, this could mean an annual or semi-annual “skills planning summit” with each business segment.

By forecasting in this way, you shift L&D from reactive order-takers to strategic partners. You’ll answer the question “How do we know what capabilities we will lack?” with data-driven confidence. For example, if you project that in 18 months, 30% of your accounting staff will need knowledge of a new cloud ERP system being implemented, you can start skilling them 6-12 months ahead of go-live. Contrast that with organizations who realize too late that their workforce doesn’t have the needed skills – those organizations scramble with external hires or suffer execution delays. As one HR tech study put it, “The greatest workforce challenge isn’t a lack of talent, but the inability to identify which skills are missing and how fast priorities are shifting”blog.getaura.ai. Your Learning Architecture function solves that by providing visibility into current and future skill gaps – effectively becoming an internal labor market analyst for skills.

4. Build vs. Buy: Deciding on Development Strategies

Once you’ve identified the critical skill gaps, the next question is how to fill them. Do you build capability internally (through upskilling/reskilling existing employees, or developing new learning content), or do you buy it (through external hiring or purchasing off-the-shelf training solutions)? The Learning Solution Architecture function must guide the organization in making these build-vs-buy decisions systematically:

• When to Build (Upskill/Reskill): In general, if a skill need is core to your business, needed at scale, or part of a long-term trend, leaning towards building internally is wise. Upskilling existing employees strengthens your culture, boosts retention, and can be faster and more cost-effective than hiring new staff. Multiple studies affirm this: on average, companies find upskilling an employee is cheaper than hiring – one analysis found it costs about $15k to upskill an IT employee versus $23k to hire a new one (an $8k saving)pluralsight.com. In fact, other research quantified upskilling cost savings at 70–92% versus external hiringpierpoint.com. Beyond cost, consider time and success rates. 66% of organizations say hiring new talent takes as long or longer than retraining someone they already havepluralsight.com – and that hire may still need onboarding and cultural adjustment. Upskilling, on the other hand, invests in people who know your business and have institutional knowledge. If the gap is in a segment where you have a strong base of employees who are willing and able to learn (e.g. teaching current analysts data science basics), building is often a win-win. Building is also preferable when the skill in question is not readily available in the labor market or when developing it internally will create a competitive advantage. For example, Shopify (Ottawa-based e-commerce firm) decided to build internal leadership and technical prowess. In 2025 Shopify began offering pay raises tied to professional development achievementscareerminds.ca – an incentive to encourage employees to gain new skills and certifications. This approach indicates that Shopify would rather grow its own technical leaders than rely solely on poaching from outside. The result is a culture where learning is “valued, rewarded, and essential to success”careerminds.ca, and it helps Shopify retain top talent in a hot tech labor market by providing career growth from withincareerminds.ca.
• When to Buy (Hire or External Solutions): There are situations where hiring new talent or buying a solution is warranted. If a skill gap is urgent and mission-critical, and you don’t have time to train up people (e.g. a sudden regulatory requirement for a certified specialist, or a new technology that none of your staff have experience in), then hiring or contracting expertise from the market can be faster. Also, if the capability will not be a long-term need or is very specialized, buying might be more cost-effective. For instance, if you need a one-time training on a niche compliance topic, it could make sense to buy off-the-shelf content or bring in an external trainer, rather than developing a custom course in-house. Another “buy” scenario is build vs buy talent: some strategic skills may be so pivotal that a company decides to recruit a seasoned expert to lead and then have that expert train others. The key is to prioritize which roles to fill externally by evaluating impact vs. internal readiness. As part of your skills intake rubric, include a “build or hire” recommendation. Factors to consider: time-to-proficiency (can we train people in time?), volume (do we need dozens of people with this skill or just one or two?), content availability (do effective learning resources exist?), and risk (what if we fail to build this capability internally?). Data can support these decisions. For example, if forecasting shows a massive surge in demand for data engineers in your industry and you have none internally, you might plan a mix: hire a few and cross-train some IT staff. Many organizations are now opting for a combined approach: redeploying and reskilling existing staff for many roles, and hiring externally for cutting-edge or senior roles to inject new knowledge. This is exactly what Verizon did through its Talent GPS program – by mapping out career paths and required skills, Verizon could see where internal talent could be moved into new roles with training, versus which gaps required outside hiresgradsoflife.orggradsoflife.org. The outcome is a more equitable and accessible career pathway system, minimizing the need to always “buy” talent from outside when internal employees can grow into the rolesgradsoflife.orggradsoflife.org.
• Using Value/Effort to Guide Build vs Buy: The value/effort scoring mentioned earlier can incorporate build vs buy considerations. A high-value skill initiative that is also high-effort to build internally might be a candidate for buying content or hiring talent. For instance, say your analysis shows a critical need for advanced cybersecurity skills across the company (high value), but your L&D team lacks any curriculum and internal expertise is low (high effort to build from scratch). You might decide to partner with a provider – as Bell Canada did by partnering with AWS for cloud training – rather than creating an internal program wholly from the ground up. Bell’s partnership accelerated their workforce’s cloud readiness and even directly boosted cloud-related sales by 67% by rapidly scaling new skillscareerminds.ca. This case demonstrates that sometimes buying external expertise or content can produce faster results, especially if the provider has proven training that keeps pace with technology.
• Content Curation and Shelf-Life: Another dimension is the shelf life of content. If you build a training program, how long will it remain relevant before needing an update? In fast-evolving fields, custom content can become obsolete quickly, meaning a shorter “shelf life.” Industry experts note that “Content’s shelf life is minimal at best… content should be as dynamic as the world our learners live in.”chieflearningofficer.com. If the topic is one with constant change (say a course on a software tool that updates every quarter), buying a subscription to a regularly updated external course library might yield better content currency than building a static internal course. The KPI “content shelf life” should be tracked: for example, measure what percentage of your learning content has been updated in the last year. A shorter shelf life (lots of content updates) indicates a rapidly changing skill domain, suggesting that your learning function must be nimble – either by continuously updating internal content or leveraging vendors who do so. E-Learning maintenance is a known headache; if your team can’t realistically update a course frequently enough, lean on external sources or user-generated content. A modern approach is to design modular, bite-sized content that can be easily replaced as parts become outdated, rather than huge courses that require complete overhaulschieflearningofficer.comchieflearningofficer.com.

In summary, the Learning Solution Architecture function should create a skills roadmap for the organization that combines both build and buy elements. IBM’s research suggests that a robust “skills roadmap” will “leverage existing skills, identify gaps, and fill them through reskilling, upskilling or redeploying talent”hrexecutive.com – essentially, maximize what you can build, and strategically fill the rest by buying. To make these decisions transparent, you might create a Build-vs-Buy decision matrix as part of your operating model. This could be a simple checklist that for each capability asks: Can this skill be developed with our current workforce in the needed timeframe? Are quality learning resources available? Is it a long-term need (favor build) or short-term project (possibly buy)? Using such a rubric drives consistency in decisions and helps explain to executives why certain investments (training programs or hiring requisitions) are being made. As a positive side effect, involving Finance in these discussions can highlight ROI: for instance, if upskilling is saving hiring costs, you can report those savings (e.g., “by certifying 50 existing employees in data science, we saved an estimated $X in recruiting costs”) – further proving the function’s value.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): Measuring Impact on Skills and Business

To solidify your credibility as an L&D leader, you need to demonstrate success with clear metrics. The following KPIs align with the goals of a Learning Solution Architecture function. They ensure you’re not just delivering training activity, but truly closing skill gaps and driving talent outcomes. These should be tracked and reported to both HR and business executives:

• Skill Gap Closure Rate: This KPI measures how effectively the identified skill gaps are being closed through your initiatives. Define a baseline for each critical skill (e.g., through assessments or proficiency ratings) and track improvement over time. For example, if at start of year only 40% of the data analysts met the “advanced Excel” proficiency and now 80% do after training, that’s a clear closure of the gap. You can express this as “% of targeted skill gaps closed” or the change in proficiency levels. It’s useful to tie this to business outcomes where possible: e.g., closing a gap in sales skills could correlate with improved sales metrics. Tracking skill gap closure reassures business leaders that training is not just happening but working – directly addressing the pain point of misalignment. (If a gap isn’t closing, it flags the need to adjust the approach.)
• Time-to-Role-Readiness: This KPI looks at how quickly employees become productive in new roles or after a major upskilling. For instance, when you onboard new hires or move an internal employee into a new role, how many months until they reach full productivity or a certain performance benchmark? The Learning Architecture function can influence this by providing better onboarding training, role-specific learning paths, or just-in-time resources. If historically it took 6 months for a software developer to get up to speed but, after revamping the onboarding and training, it now takes 4 months, that’s a tangible impact – reducing the “time-to-role-readiness” by 33%. One case study: Elara Caring (US healthcare) used a tailored employee development platform and reduced new-hire onboarding time from weeks to just one day by streamlining learning workflowshrexecutive.com. While one day to full productivity is extreme (healthcare onboarding admin tasks), it shows what targeted learning interventions can do. For internal upskilling, you might measure the time it takes for an employee to transition from their old role to a new in-demand role after training. Shortening this ramp-up time accelerates the organization’s agility. Make sure to define “role-ready” in collaboration with business leaders (it could be hitting a sales quota, independently managing a project, etc.).
• Content Shelf Life (Refresh Rate): As discussed, content shelf life is about keeping learning materials relevant. A concrete way to measure this is the percentage of learning content updated or replaced in the last year. If your content shelf life is too long, it means people are training on outdated information – a risk to the business. Aim to have a healthy refresh rate especially in fast-changing skill areas. Another measure is average age of content in the training catalog (perhaps weighted by usage). If you find that 70% of course content in your IT curriculum is over 3 years old, that might be a red flag. Your KPI target could be to reduce that to, say, 30% over 3 years old by year’s end. This metric drives the team to continuously curate and modernize the learning library, either by updating in-house courses or sourcing newer external content. Modern L&D functions often adopt a “dynamic content” approach, acknowledging that “creating a class or e-learning that has any shelf life is unrealistic… we need a stronger, scalable way to collect and update content as it changes”chieflearningofficer.comchieflearningofficer.com. Monitoring content shelf life makes this a priority and ensures learners aren’t consuming stale knowledge.
• Content Reuse Rate: Developing new training is resource-intensive, so maximizing reuse (using one asset for multiple purposes or audiences) improves ROI. This KPI can be defined as the proportion of learning content that is leveraged across multiple programs or departments. For example, if you create a module on “Effective Virtual Collaboration,” measure how many different roles or teams end up using it. If only one team used it, it’s single-use; if five different departments integrated it into their learning plans, that’s high reuse. A high reuse rate indicates you are building versatile, modular content that meets widespread needs – a sign of efficiency and good content design. It also reflects that you’ve avoided siloed training development. Set targets to increase reuse: e.g., “Each new course should be reused by at least 2 different audiences” or “Achieve 50% of all courses used in more than one business unit.” Reuse rate ties back to alignment as well: if multiple segments have similar skill needs, one solution can address all, ensuring consistency. Additionally, high reuse often correlates with cost savings (less duplication) and shorter development cycles, which you can highlight to stakeholders.
• Internal Mobility and Career Progression: Internal mobility is both an outcome and enabler of a skills-oriented strategy. Track metrics like internal fill rate of job openings (what percentage of vacancies are filled by existing employees vs external hires) and employee movement across roles or departments. If your Learning Architecture function is successful, internal mobility should increase because employees are gaining skills for growth and the organization is intentionally developing people for future roles. Leading organizations see this as a prime measure of a learning culture’s impact. “Retention rates, internal mobility and engagement are critical indicators… they reflect whether employees are matched to the right roles and if the organization truly fosters continuous learning and development,” notes ServiceNow’s talent VPhrexecutive.com. A rising internal mobility rate means you are effectively converting skill building into career opportunities, which also boosts retention (employees stay when they can advance). For example, suppose a Canadian telecom company had an internal fill rate of 20% last year and after implementing a skills development program (e.g., coding bootcamps for network engineers), the internal fill rate for tech roles rose to 35%. That’s a win: more roles filled in-house, less recruiting cost, and a sign that upskilling is preparing employees for those roles. Internal mobility can be further segmented into lateral moves vs promotions, or cross-functional moves, depending on what you want to encourage.
• Other Complementary Metrics: In addition to the core KPIs above, consider tracking engagement and satisfaction with learning (are employees finding the programs valuable?), as well as business performance indicators linked to skill initiatives. For instance, if you trained the customer service team on a new skill, what happened to customer satisfaction or call resolution rates? Always connect the dots from skill metric to business metric. One financial example: after an upskilling program in a bank’s wealth management division on relationship-building skills, they might track an increase in client retention or cross-sell rates. If you can report “Training X contributed to outcome Y,” you solidify the strategic value of L&D. Also track learning ROI in cost terms: reduced external hiring costs (from internal promotions), improved productivity (maybe measured via output per employee), and retention impact (e.g., did turnover drop in populations offered career development?). A Gallup study found companies are 17% more productive when employees get the training they needpierpoint.com, and LinkedIn’s research famously noted 94% of employees would stay longer at a company that invests in their career developmentpierpoint.com. Such figures reinforce why your KPIs matter to the C-suite.

In reporting these KPIs, use visuals and dashboards to make the impact clear. Show year-over-year improvement and benchmarks if available. The goal is to make L&D’s contribution to talent and business health as quantifiable as sales or finance data. Over time, these metrics will also help you refine the strategy (for example, if content reuse is low, maybe needs analysis is too siloed; if internal mobility isn’t improving, maybe more career path transparency or coaching is needed, as Verizon’s journey illustrated with its “Journey Forward” communications to employees about career opportunitiesgradsoflife.orggradsoflife.org).

Quick Win: Launch a 90-Day Pilot to Demonstrate the Approach

To build momentum and prove the concept, execute a focused 90-day pilot of the Learning Solution Architecture function in one segment of the business. This pilot will serve as a microcosm of the broader strategy, allowing you to refine the intake, design, and implementation processes on a smaller scale – and crucially, to earn quick wins that get executive buy-in for scaling up. Here’s a step-by-step plan for the 90 days (aligned with best practiceseducate360.comeducate360.com):

• Days 1–30: Foundation Setting – Select one business segment or role group as the pilot area (for example, choose a segment where the pain is acute, such as an IT department facing rapid skill obsolescence, or a customer-facing team needing new skills for a product launch). In the first month, conduct stakeholder interviews with key managers and team leads in that segmenteducate360.com. Confirm their top 1-2 business objectives and associated skill gaps. Also review any existing training programs for that group and identify misalignments (courses that don’t tie to current needs). By day 30, aim to have a skills gap assessment completed for this segment and an intake list of the training needs (perhaps you uncover, say, five distinct skill needs). Also identify a “quick win” opportunity – a skill need that is relatively simple to address and can show results quicklyeducate360.com. For example, if the sales team lacks product knowledge on a new offering, a quick win might be a rapid e-learning module or cheat-sheet that can be produced fast.
• Days 31–60: Strategic Design – In the second month, prioritize and design one or two pilot learning solutions tied to business KPIs of that segmenteducate360.com. Use the value/effort matrix to choose which need to tackle first – ideally the high-value, low-effort one identified as a quick win. Co-design the solution with input from the business: for instance, if it’s a sales skill, work with the sales manager to incorporate real scenarios. Set clear success metrics and baselines noweducate360.com: e.g., “after training, we expect support ticket resolution time to drop by 20%” or “we aim for 80% of the team to earn the certification.” Establish how you will measure those (collect baseline data now). Also prepare the messaging and change management – communicate to participants and their leaders why this training matters, how it links to goals, and what support is expected. During this phase, you should also practice the intake and rubric process: if there were five needs in the backlog, perhaps you can’t address all in the pilot – document why you chose the ones you did (value/effort reasoning) so you can explain this prioritization approach. If helpful, involve a cross-functional partner in design (maybe someone from that segment’s team as a subject matter expert) to foster buy-in.
• Days 61–90: Launch and Iterate – In the third month, deliver the pilot training solution and gather feedbackeducate360.com. This might involve running a workshop, rolling out an e-learning, or a mix. Monitor early indicators: attendance, completion, initial feedback, and if possible some immediate performance metrics. For example, in a pilot with a customer support team, you might see within weeks if average call handling time is improving. Hold a quick review at day ~75 with the stakeholders: what’s working, what needs adjustment? Adjust as needed before the pilot concludeseducate360.com. By day 90, compile an early impact reporteducate360.com. Show the before vs. after on your success metrics (even if full impact isn’t realized yet, show progress or leading indicators). Include qualitative quotes from participants or managers (e.g., “My team feels much more confident handling cloud-related inquiries after this training”). If the pilot included creating any new processes (like the intake form or value/effort scoring), note how these aided decision-making. Essentially, distill how the pilot’s approach differed from “business as usual” and the benefits observed.
• Share and Celebrate Results: Present the 90-day pilot outcomes to the executive sponsor and governance group. Start with the business outcome (e.g., “Customer complaints resolved on first call went from 60% to 75% after our targeted training – a 15-point increaseeducate360.com, which is projected to save $200K in annual escalation costs” – hypothetical example in line with aligning metricseducate360.com). Then explain how the Learning Solution Architecture approach enabled that: (intake of a clear need, rapid design with business input, focused execution, measurement). Emphasize the quick win and build enthusiasm: this is only 90 days, imagine scaling this across the enterprise. Also be candid about lessons learned and planned tweaks to the model post-pilot.

A strong 90-day start builds credibility and momentum. It shows skeptics that aligning learning tightly to skill demand isn’t a theoretical exercise – it delivers real value quicklyeducate360.comeducate360.com. It’s often said that “early wins secure leadership support”, and our experience supports that: once executives see concrete ROI from a pilot, they are more likely to invest in expanding the programeducate360.comeducate360.com. Moreover, a pilot provides a template and internal case study you can reference as you roll out the Learning Architecture function company-wide. For instance, if someone in another department is unsure about the new intake process, you can point to the pilot segment’s feedback: “The marketing team found that by articulating their needs through the new rubric, L&D delivered a solution that boosted their KPI by 15% in one quarter.” Nothing speaks louder than success.

Case Studies and Examples of Alignment in Action

To further strengthen the business case for this Learning Solution Architecture approach, let’s look at a few real-world examples (primarily Canadian and some U.S.) where companies aligned learning investments with skill demands and achieved notable results:

• Bell Canada – Upskilling for Digital Transformation: Bell, Canada’s largest telecom, recognized that to lead in a digital economy, it needed to infuse new cloud and data skills across its workforce. Instead of purely hiring new talent, Bell partnered with AWS to upskill thousands of employees in cloud technologies. The program provided employees access to cloud certification training and hands-on projects. The results were tangible: cloud-related solution sales jumped by 67% following the upskilling initiativecareerminds.ca. Bell also created pathways for traditional telecom staff (like network technicians) to retrain into high-demand areas such as cybersecurity and AIcareerminds.ca, boosting internal mobility. Key takeaway: By forecasting the need for cloud skills and acting to build them internally, Bell not only filled its skill gaps but also reaped business rewards (increased sales) and improved retention of employees who saw growth opportunities. This exemplifies aligning a skills roadmap with business strategy (in Bell’s case, pivoting to digital and cloud services) and using a mix of build (training current staff) and buy (strategic vendor partnership) to get there.
• Shopify – Continuous Growth Culture: Shopify, a leading tech company in Ottawa with ~11,000 employees, built a culture where learning is directly tied to career progression. In 2025, Shopify rolled out an initiative linking pay raises to professional development achievementscareerminds.ca. Employees are encouraged (and funded) to pursue relevant certifications, leadership development courses, and new technical skills. For example, a developer who learns a new programming language or a manager who completes an advanced leadership program can see a salary bump as a result. This innovative approach ensures roadmaps stay aligned to skill demand because employees themselves are scanning for what skills the business values. It effectively crowdsources part of the skill gap identification: if AI skills become important, many employees will start learning them to earn the reward, in turn equipping Shopify with those capabilities. Key takeaway: Incentivizing learning that aligns with company needs reinforces that learning is essential to success herecareerminds.ca. Shopify’s retention has benefited (people feel invested in) and the company fills skill needs from within. While not every company may tie learning to compensation so directly, the principle of making learning rewarding and visibly valued is broadly applicable.
• Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) – Skills Blueprint and Talent Mobility: RBC, Canada’s largest bank, took a strategic, skill-centric approach to workforce development. They created the RBC Skills Blueprint, which explicitly aimed to “help employees develop in-demand skills to thrive as the world of work changes”rbc.com. A key part of this blueprint was to uncover insights into employee skills and market demands, and then match employees to career pathways that meet both their aspirations and RBC’s business needsrbc.comrbc.com. In practice, RBC invested in tools for employees to assess their skills and explore internal career opportunities (e.g., the RBC Upskill digital platform). They also emphasized moving talent across the organization to meet emerging needs – effectively enabling internal mobility at scalerbc.com. For example, an RBC employee in a branch role could discover they have adjacent skills for a growing area like anti-fraud analytics, and RBC provides training and a path to transition into that role. RBC’s approach addresses the forecast and internal build vs buy question by heavily leaning into reskilling and redeploying existing employees. RBC leaders have said this is crucial for high performance and innovation: keeping employee skills relevant not only fills roles but improves client service and drives resiliencerbc.comrbc.com. Key takeaway: A comprehensive skills blueprint ensures alignment from the top – RBC clearly signaled that skill development is a strategic priority, with metrics tracked in annual reportsrbc.com. The result is a workforce that is more adaptable, and a company that can respond to change by reallocating and upskilling staff instead of resorting mostly to external hires.
• Verizon (U.S.) – Talent GPS and Skills-Based Career Paths: Verizon’s case is instructive for building an operating model around skills. Verizon launched Talent GPS in 2021, an internal platform that provides “a transparent view of jobs across Verizon with insights into the key skills required to succeed in each role”gradsoflife.orggradsoflife.org. In other words, Verizon mapped out every role’s skill profile and made that visible to employees. Employees can see how their current skills stack up and what they’d need to move into another role, aligning their development plans with company needs. Verizon also updated its job architecture to ensure roles and titles matched market trends (so that their skills framework wasn’t using outdated or insular definitions)gradsoflife.org. The company uses data from this system in workforce planning: “Verizon’s annual planning cycle leverages the skills data in Talent GPS to define talent roadmaps, identifying what talent is in place and the skills needed for future growth.”gradsoflife.org This explicit integration of skills data into business planning is exactly what a Learning Solution Architecture function aspires to do. The results for Verizon include greater internal mobility and diversity in talent pipelines – managers are now encouraged to consider internal candidates who have, say, 70% of the required skills and can learn the rest, rather than only looking for external hires. Key takeaway: Investing in skills visibility and clear career pathways can transform a large organization’s talent dynamics. It requires upfront effort (building taxonomies, engaging stakeholders like HR, IT, and legal for governanceaspeninstitute.orgaspeninstitute.org), but it pays off by enabling proactive development and deployment of talent. Verizon’s approach also underscores the cultural aspect: they communicated the “why” to employees – linking personal growth to company strategy (their “Journey Forward” initiative ties all career programs together under a narrative so employees see the big picturegradsoflife.org). This kind of narrative can be powerful in your own organization: it’s not just about training programs, it’s about empowering employees to navigate their careers while filling the company’s skill needs.
• Additional Examples: Other organizations echo these practices. Scotiabank, for instance, invested $500 million in its ScotiaRISE initiative, part of which goes to education and skills development for both employees and community – strengthening inclusion and future talent poolscareerminds.cacareerminds.ca. While a lot of ScotiaRISE is external-facing, internally Scotiabank also upskilled thousands in digital banking skills, aligning L&D with its shift to digital services. Hydro-Québec, a major Canadian utility, recognized the energy sector’s shift toward renewables and electric vehicles; they launched internal trades training programs to ensure their workforce can build and maintain new green infrastructure (thereby forecasting a capability gap in electrical and grid modernization skills and addressing it through apprenticeships and upskilling). And in the U.S., companies like Amazon and AT&T have made headlines with large-scale upskilling commitments (Amazon’s Career Choice program, AT&T’s Workforce 2020 initiative) which were responses to forecasted skill gaps in tech and have led to thousands of employees transitioning to higher-skill roles. Each of these examples reinforces the theme: aligning learning to evolving skill needs is now a business imperative, not just an HR initiativecareerminds.ca. Those who do it effectively (like the companies above) see better talent retention, greater innovation, and stronger competitive positioningcareerminds.ca.

Conclusion and Next Steps

In a world where technology and market forces continuously reshape job requirements, the only way an organization – and an L&D leader – stays ahead is by architecting learning programs that are dynamic and closely aligned to business strategy. By establishing a Learning Solution Architecture function, you create the engine to do exactly that. You’ll forecast tomorrow’s skills today, prioritize development that yields maximum ROI, and ensure every learning activity ladder ups to closing a real capability gap.

For immediate next steps, focus on socializing this plan with your executive team and stakeholders. Use the language of business outcomes: for example, talk about how this approach will “reduce time to productivity for new strategic initiatives” or “save recruiting costs by building critical skills internally (saving ~70% per person per skill vs hiring)pierpoint.com.” Present the case studies as evidence – “Bell did this and saw a 67% sales increasecareerminds.ca; Verizon implemented a similar skills mapping and now plans talent with precision.” Lay out the pilot plan and invite a business unit to volunteer as the first segment (often, finding a willing partner who feels the pain point is key).

While executing the pilot, start developing the tools you’ll need – the intake rubric, the skills taxonomy, the dashboard for KPIs – even if in draft form. You can refine them as data comes in. Build relationships with your CIO or data analytics team if you need support on the skills data infrastructure (e.g., leveraging HRIS data or external labor market data feeds). Also, consider quick training for your own L&D team if they need to build capabilities in areas like data analysis or consulting approach – leading by example will show that L&D is also upskilling itself to meet this challenge.

Finally, keep the narrative personal and engaging. As the L&D executive, communicate your vision in human terms: you are enabling people to grow into the roles of the future, and enabling the organization to achieve its goals through its people. Share stories: perhaps an anecdote of an employee who, through upskilling, moved from a declining role to a high-demand role – benefiting both their career and the company. This puts a face to the strategy and reinforces the why. As one learning leader said, “We’re creating a culture of opportunity and growth, not a transactional training program”aspeninstitute.orgaspeninstitute.org.

By following this playbook, you will not only address the immediate pain of drifting roadmaps but also establish yourself as the go-to enterprise L&D leader – one who bridges the gap between strategy and skills. In doing so, you transform L&D from a cost center into a strategic force that powers business success. Here’s to architecting a future-ready learning function that keeps your organization one step ahead in the skills race.

Endnotes (References):

1. Educate 360, “Misaligned Training Is Costing You More Than You Think” – noting that 80% of L&D teams lack strong alignment with business strategyeducate360.com.
2. GetAura (Workforce Analytics Blog), “The Real Skills Gap: It’s About Visibility” – 58% of L&D leaders cite aligning training to future business needs as a top challengeblog.getaura.ai.
3. IBM Institute for Business Value via HRExt, “Need a skills roadmap that works? (IBM & ServiceNow)” – concept that a skills roadmap means redefining roles and identifying gaps to fill via reskilling/upskillinghrexecutive.com; also metrics like internal mobility as key indicatorshrexecutive.com.
4. Verizon Case Study (Grads of Life, 2023), “Embracing a Skills-First Approach to Career Mobility” – describes Verizon’s Talent GPS, new job architecture aligned to market skills, and use of skills data in planninggradsoflife.orggradsoflife.org.
5. Educate 360, “90-Day Plan to Start Aligning Now” – outlines the value of a 90-day pilot with steps for quick wins and momentumeducate360.comeducate360.com.
6. Careerminds (Rafael Spuldar), “Top 5 Canadian Companies Investing in Upskilling” – examples: Bell Canada’s cloud upskilling resulting in 67% increase in cloud salescareerminds.ca; Shopify’s pay-for-development initiative reinforcing learning culturecareerminds.ca.
7. RBC, “Skills Blueprint” (2022) – RBC’s strategic plan to focus on in-demand skills, internal mobility, and matching employees’ skills to business needsrbc.comrbc.com.
8. Pluralsight “Hire or Upskill? Tech Skill Development” (2024) – found average cost to hire tech talent ($23.5k) vs upskill ($15.2k), and that 66% of orgs say hiring takes as long or longer than upskillingpluralsight.compluralsight.com.
9. Pierpoint (Ignacio Martin), “Economic Impact of Upskilling & Reskilling in 2025” – cites studies showing 70–92% cost savings when upskilling vs hiringpierpoint.com and other ROI stats (e.g., 94% employees stay if developed)pierpoint.com.
10. Springboard, “Upskilling and Reskilling in the Age of Tech Disruption” (Jan 2024) – notes skill half-life <5 years (tech ~2.5 years)springboard.com and that recruitment can cost 0.5–2x salary (Gallup) making upskilling a no-brainerspringboard.com.
11. Chief Learning Officer (Bob Mosher), “The Diminishing Shelf Life of Learning” – argues that content must be dynamic; “content’s shelf life is minimal at best” and needs continuous updates in today’s pacechieflearningofficer.com.
12. ServiceNow case via HRExt – Elara Caring onboarding time reduced from weeks to a day through better talent workflowshrexecutive.com, demonstrating impact of aligning learning processes to org needs (onboarding speed).