Start anywhere.
Go as far as
makes sense.

In-person kickoff with Talent Management, Job Architecture owner, HRBPs and functional leaders, and Corporate Strategy. Document and platform review runs in parallel. Follow-on virtual interviews surface the gap between what the organization believes its skills infrastructure does and what it actually does. Two-stage findings delivery.

Four parallel workstreams: taxonomy design and role-to-skills mapping (with pressure test); integration design — functional and technical; change management and governance running alongside the build. Goal extends beyond role definitions — capturing what employees can actually do, not just what their current role requires.

Structured handoff model with a clear trajectory toward organizational independence. 90-day check-in is the highest-risk window — adoption either takes hold or quietly erodes. Semi-annual health checks cover taxonomy currency, adoption depth, data integrity, and strategic alignment.

In-person kickoff with Talent Management, Job Architecture owner, HRBPs, functional leaders, Total Rewards, and Legal. For global organizations, co-determination obligations (e.g. German Works Council) are identified as a design constraint from the start. Document review typically surfaces the gap between the architecture that was designed and the one that has actually evolved.

Starts from what exists and rationalizes rather than rebuilding from scratch. Four workstreams: current-state rationalization; leveling framework design (conducted carefully — leveling affects compensation, career expectations, and org identity); skills-integrated role profile development; governance and rollout design including Works Council consultation where applicable.

90-day check-in assesses whether the architecture is being used consistently and where workarounds have appeared. Bi-annual reviews catch drift before it compounds — a cadence that works well in practice for mature architectures. On-call access for M&A, restructuring, and co-determination events.

Before any structural analysis begins, TDI surfaces risks and flags them in writing with senior leadership — ensuring the organization can make a genuine go/no-go decision with full visibility rather than discovering problems after the fact. Kickoff with the most senior leader commissioning the work, Corporate Strategy, and Legal where workforce implications exist.

Five workstreams: design principles; structural design (two to three options, not a single prescription); role clarity and decision rights; capability mapping and transition planning (straightforward when Components 01 and 02 are in place; requires more deliberate assessment when they are not); change management and communication. Co-determination obligations designed in from the start, not accommodated at the end.

Most restructurings look fine at launch. The 90-day session goes below the surface — assessing whether the operating model has actually changed, whether decisions are being made at the right levels, and whether the capability requirements of the new structure are being met. Bi-annual reviews keep the structure intentional rather than accidental.

Kickoff structured around functions: business leader or delegate, HRBP, learning partner, Finance, Talent Management, and Corporate Strategy for each major function. Two parallel tracks: process audit (what the planning actually produces vs. genuine foresight) and data quality assessment (whether the skills data that planning requires actually exists). Many organizations discover in this diagnostic that the data problem is the planning problem.

Five workstreams: planning process architecture; skills-based workforce analysis; Build/Borrow/Buy/Bot decision framework with governance guidelines — built in whatever tool the client has (TDI can develop a lightweight decision support tool where none exists); scenario modeling (two to three future-state scenarios); governance design. The long-term vision: succession at scale.

Quarterly in year one — synchronized with the planning cycle to pressure-test inputs before planning runs and review outputs before decisions are made. As skills intelligence matures and the organization builds confidence running the process independently, advisory steps back. The long-term goal is succession at scale: continuous AI-assisted visibility into capability, readiness, and supply.

Assessment of the current talent acquisition function — evaluating how hiring decisions are made, how skills intelligence is used in sourcing and selection, and where the gaps are between current practice and a skills-grounded acquisition capability. Includes assessment of internal mobility infrastructure and whether external search is being triggered prematurely.

End-to-end redesign of how the organization defines what it is hiring for, how it sources against those definitions, and how it assesses candidates against skills-based criteria rather than credential proxies. Includes skills-integrated job profile design, sourcing strategy, assessment framework design, and interviewer enablement. Onboarding design connects acquisition to Performance Intelligence and L&D.

Ongoing strategic counsel ensuring hiring strategy stays connected to workforce planning, skills data continues to drive sourcing and selection, and the organization is ahead of critical talent supply challenges rather than reacting to them.

Assessment of the organization's contingent and extended workforce — evaluating size, composition, cost, visibility, and strategic fit. Surfaces where the contingent workforce is working as a deliberate strategy and where it has become a default. Examines the governance gap between HR and Procurement.

End-to-end total workforce strategy — integrating contingent and permanent workforce management under a common strategic framework. Includes Build/Borrow/Buy/Bot decision governance, contingent skills capture infrastructure, vendor management strategy, and the governance model that bridges HR and Procurement.

Ongoing counsel ensuring the Build/Borrow/Buy/Bot framework is being applied consistently, contingent workforce costs and value are being tracked, and the organization's full talent picture remains visible across both permanent and extended populations.

Structured assessment of current career development and internal mobility practices — evaluating how well the organization enables internal movement, what is preventing it, and where the gaps are between stated intent and actual practice. Manager behavior and headcount hoarding are frequently surfaced as primary barriers.

End-to-end design of the systems, processes, and culture conditions that make internal career development and mobility real — from skills-based career path design through internal opportunity infrastructure and manager enablement. Addresses the behavioral dimension: managers must be enabled and incentivized to develop talent for the organization, not hoard it for their teams.

Ongoing counsel ensuring the infrastructure stays current, managers are using it effectively, and internal mobility is genuinely reducing external hiring pressure. Movement rates, development progress, and retention impact reviewed quarterly.

Assessment of the current succession planning practice — evaluating the integrity of existing slates, the quality of readiness assessment, and the strength of the development pipeline behind critical roles. Surfaces whether succession is based on evidence or visibility, and whether critical roles below the most senior levels are being addressed.

End-to-end succession architecture — from critical role identification through skills-based readiness assessment, pipeline development design, and the governance model that keeps slates current and development plans active. Addresses succession below the C-suite, where most organizations have the least visibility and the highest unexamined risk.

Ongoing counsel ensuring succession slates stay current, readiness assessments reflect actual capability development, and the pipeline behind critical roles is genuinely building. Quarterly reviews assess slate integrity, development quality, and retention of identified successors.

Assessment of current high potential identification and development practices — evaluating the rigor and fairness of identification, the quality of development experiences, and the degree to which the program is actually building the pipeline it is intended to build. Surfaces whether the program is reinforcing existing visibility patterns or genuinely identifying capability wherever it exists.

End-to-end design of a skills-grounded high potential identification and development system — from objective identification criteria through accelerated development design and the governance that makes it credible. Development experiences are calibrated to specific capability gaps rather than generic leadership programs.

Ongoing counsel ensuring the program stays rigorous, fair, and connected to the succession pipeline it is meant to build. Quarterly reviews assess identification integrity, development quality, retention of identified HiPos, and contribution to succession slates.

Assessment of the current performance management system — evaluating how well it measures what matters, how it connects to development and reward, and where the gaps are between current practice and a genuine performance intelligence capability. Surfaces whether the system is producing compliance or intelligence.

End-to-end redesign of the performance management system — moving from a compliance-based annual process to a continuous performance intelligence capability that connects to development, reward, and talent decisions. Skills data grounds performance assessment in capability rather than subjective impression.

Ongoing counsel ensuring the system continues to produce useful data, managers are using it effectively, and performance and development remain connected rather than drifting back into separate annual events. Quarterly health reviews assess data quality, adoption depth, and decision impact.

Assessment of the current learning and development function — evaluating how well it is connected to skills intelligence, how effectively it drives behavior change versus knowledge transfer, and where the gaps are between investment and impact. Surfaces whether L&D is producing capability or activity.

End-to-end learning architecture design — from skills gap identification through learning pathway design, delivery infrastructure, and measurement against capability outcomes rather than completion events. Learning as the primary vehicle for organizational change, not just knowledge transfer.

Ongoing counsel ensuring the learning architecture stays connected to evolving skills needs, investment decisions are grounded in data, and the function is producing genuine capability development. Quarterly effectiveness reviews assess capability outcomes, adoption, and business impact.

Assessment of the current total rewards program — evaluating market competitiveness, internal equity, alignment to talent strategy, and connection to skills intelligence. Surfaces whether compensation architecture is responding to skills market dynamics or lagging behind them.

Total rewards strategy and architecture redesign — building a hot skills premium mechanism into the compensation architecture that responds to market dynamics faster than annual surveys allow. Identifying a hot skills gap is only half the problem: organizations need to model the financial impact, build the business case, and plan the timing. AI speeds the inputs; the organizational approval timeline is human-paced — and this engagement accounts for both.

Ongoing counsel ensuring compensation stays competitive, hot skills premiums are being applied, and the total rewards architecture continues to support the talent strategy. Quarterly reviews assess market competitiveness, hot skills risk, and internal equity.

Assessment of the organization's change readiness and adoption capability — evaluating how well the organization manages transformation, where adoption typically breaks down, and what the change architecture needs to look like for a specific initiative to succeed. Surfaces senior leadership commitment as a non-negotiable condition for adoption success.

End-to-end change architecture — running alongside the implementation it is supporting, not added at the end. Covers change strategy and communications design, manager and employee enablement, steering committee governance, adoption measurement infrastructure, and course-correction protocols. Skills intelligence becomes the measurement substrate that makes adoption visible over time.

Ongoing counsel providing the expert perspective that helps the organization course-correct when adoption is stalling, sustain what has been built, and build internal change capability over time. Quarterly adoption health reviews assess depth, durability, and population-level adoption patterns.