Building a training plan for a technical team in 5 steps

In short:

1. An effective training plan starts from a map of the team’s current and future skills.
2. 5 formats cover most needs: short course, degree programme, self-training, webinars, mentoring.
3. Self-training on reliable technical resources meets one-off needs, structured courses meet deep upskilling needs.
4. In France, funding combines the skills development plan, the CPF and, for companies with fewer than 50 employees, OPCO support.

Start from skills, not from the catalogue

Many training plans are built from training providers’ catalogues, request by request. The result is often scattered and loosely linked to the team’s projects. The reverse approach works better: first identify the skills needed, then choose the formats.

Step 1: map the skills

A simple matrix crosses team members with key skills: software, calculation methods, applicable standards, processes, project management. Each cell gets a level, for example from 1 (basics) to 4 (expert able to train others). The same matrix, filled in for needs two or three years ahead, reveals the gaps.

Step 2: prioritise the gaps

Not all gaps are equally urgent. Three criteria help prioritise: the risk to ongoing projects, dependence on a single person for a critical skill, and new requirements (revised standard, new tool, new market).

Step 3: choose the right format

Formats can be combined: a short course on calculation software provides the basics, then practical guides and reference technical documentation help handle cases met in projects.

Step 4: fund the plan

In France, the employer funds the actions in the skills development plan. Employees can add their personal training account for certifying courses. Companies with fewer than 50 employees can ask their skills operator (OPCO) for support.

Step 5: measure what was learned

Training only has value if the skill is used afterwards. The skills matrix, updated once or twice a year, serves as an indicator. It shows whether gaps are closing and guides the next plan.

Example of a skills matrix

Here is an extract from a matrix for a six-person mechanical engineering office. Levels range from 1 (basics) to 4 (expert able to train others), and the last column shows the level targeted for the team in two years.

This simple table reveals several findings: a strong dependence on a single person for analysis, a collective need on tolerancing, and a new skill to build in additive manufacturing. Each calls for a different format: mentoring and a long course for analysis, a short in-house course for tolerancing, technology watch and specialised training for additive manufacturing.

Linking the plan to professional reviews

In France, the professional review provided for by the Labour Code focuses on the employee’s career prospects, particularly in terms of qualifications and employment. It is the natural moment to compare the skills matrix with each person’s wishes. An engineer interested in simulation will be more committed to a long course than a colleague assigned to it without having chosen it.

Matching team needs with individual projects makes it possible to build a plan that is both useful for the company and motivating for employees. Gaps for which no internal volunteer can be found point to a recruitment need rather than a training need.

The role of self-training

Technical teams’ needs are often occasional: understanding a process before a meeting with a supplier, checking a calculation method, discovering the requirements of a standard. A multi-day course is not suited to these situations. Self-training on reliable resources works better, provided the following are available:

• reference technical documentation, validated and up to date, covering the team’s fields;
• practical and methodological guides, directly applicable in projects;
• short content, such as webinars or learning modules, to discover a topic;
• recognised time to devote to it, otherwise self-training remains theoretical.

Self-training does not replace structured courses for deep upskilling, but it maintains skills between sessions and makes it possible to handle questions when they arise.

Evaluating training effectiveness

The widely used Kirkpatrick model distinguishes four levels of evaluation:

Most companies stop at the first level. For a technical team, the third level is the most telling: the skills matrix, updated after a few months of practice, provides a simple measure.

Common mistakes

1. Building the plan from catalogues rather than from the team’s needs.
2. Training without quick practice: a skill not used in the following weeks fades fast.
3. Concentrating expertise on a single person, which creates fragility in case of absence or departure.
4. Neglecting access to resources after training: without reference documentation, skills are not maintained.
5. Never measuring results, which prevents adjusting the next plan.

Planning over several years

Some skills take years to build, especially in calculation, standards or new manufacturing processes. A training plan limited to the current year tends to favour short, urgent courses at the expense of these long-term investments. Setting out a two- or three-year roadmap for key skills, reviewed each year with the skills matrix, keeps both horizons in view and makes budget decisions easier to justify.

Drawing on internal experts

The team’s experts are an often underused training resource. An experienced engineer who runs a half-day internal session, writes a methodological note or supports a colleague on a first project passes on company-specific know-how that no external provider can teach. This role must, however, be recognised and built into their workload, otherwise knowledge transfer always comes after project emergencies.

Internal sessions also have a side benefit: preparing them forces experts to formalise what they know, which often produces documentation the whole team can reuse. Recording these sessions or turning them into short written guides extends their value well beyond the people who attended.

Involving managers

Team managers play a decisive role at every stage of the plan. They know the upcoming projects and therefore the skills that will be needed, they free up time for training, and they are best placed to check, a few months later, whether new skills are actually being used. A plan drawn up by the HR department alone, without the managers’ input, often remains a list of courses disconnected from the team’s reality. Holding a short annual meeting between HR and each technical manager, matrix in hand, is enough to align priorities, budget and the timing of training around project peaks.

Frequently asked questions