Free Competency Framework Template | Role-Based Examples & Proficiency Levels
Free Competency Framework Template | Role-Based Examples & Proficiency Levels
An internal talent marketplace only delivers value if employees know it exists, trust it, and actually use it. With the right survey questions, you can measure seven critical experience dimensions — from visibility and fairness to psychological safety — and identify where your system is failing before talent walks out the door.
Why an Internal Talent Marketplace Without Employee Feedback Runs Blind
Many organizations believe they have adequate transparency around internal career opportunities. The data tells a different story: 92% of HR leaders say they have sufficient skills visibility — while 74% of the same group admit that lack of visibility impedes their business objectives (Fuel50, 2025). This gap is symptomatic of the core design flaw in most internal talent marketplace implementations: HR measures what they offer, not what employees actually experience.
The downstream costs are significant. Employees stay 41% longer at companies with high internal mobility (LinkedIn data, cited by Fuel50). External hires, by contrast, cost 18–20% more than internal moves for equivalent positions (Matthew Bidwell, Wharton). The implication: an internal talent marketplace that employees don't know about or don't trust isn't an asset — it's a wasted investment.
The Seven Experience Dimensions of an Internal Talent Marketplace
An effective survey doesn't just measure satisfaction with a tool. It surfaces the perception layers that determine whether employees recognize internal opportunities, pursue them, and successfully navigate the process.
| Dimension | Core Question | Typical Risk at Low Score |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Visibility | Do employees know where to find internal roles? | Marketplace exists but isn't used |
| 2. Fairness & Access | Do all groups experience equal access to opportunities? | Trust erosion; works council relevance in some regions |
| 3. Manager & HR Support | Do managers enable or block internal applications? | Manager resistance is the most common mobility killer |
| 4. Skills Clarity | Do employees understand what skills they need for target roles? | Applications don't happen due to uncertainty |
| 5. Move Experience | How smooth is the internal transition process? | Poor word-of-mouth; future candidates are deterred |
| 6. Psychological Safety | Do employees fear negative consequences for applying internally? | Actual willingness to move much lower than stated |
| 7. Intent to Stay | Would better internal options improve retention? | Retention levers unused; departures avoidable |
Survey Questions by Dimension (5-Point Likert Scale)
The following questions are designed for a standardized survey with a Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Open-ended follow-up questions are included for each dimension.
Dimension 1: Visibility
- I know where to find current internal job postings or project opportunities.
- Internal career opportunities are communicated clearly and regularly at our company.
- I have actively searched for internal opportunities in the past six months. (Yes / No / I didn't know where to look)
- Open-ended: How do you typically learn about internal roles or projects?
Dimension 2: Fairness & Access
- All employees have equal access to internal career opportunities — regardless of team, location, or function.
- Internal selection processes are transparent and understandable.
- I believe decisions about internal moves are made based on clear, consistent criteria.
- Open-ended: Has there ever been a situation where you felt access to internal opportunities was unfair?
Dimension 3: Manager & HR Support
- My manager would actively support me if I wanted to apply for an internal role.
- HR helps me identify suitable internal opportunities.
- Applying internally is treated as a positive signal at our company — not a loyalty issue.
- Open-ended: What would you want from your manager or HR to make better use of internal mobility?
Dimension 4: Skills Clarity
- I know what competencies I need for the internal roles I'm interested in.
- Internal job requirements are clearly and realistically defined.
- I understand how my current skills connect to internal opportunities.
- Open-ended: What information is missing that would help you know whether you're ready for an internal role?
Dimension 5: Move Experience
(For employees who have already made an internal move)
- The internal transition process was smooth and well-organized.
- Onboarding support in my new role was adequate.
- I would recommend that colleagues consider making an internal move.
- Open-ended: What could have been better about the transition process?
Dimension 6: Psychological Safety
- I don't fear negative consequences if I apply for an internal role.
- I can talk openly about my career ambitions at this company — even if that means moving out of my current team.
- Exploring internal opportunities is actively encouraged here — not just quietly tolerated.
- Open-ended: Is there anything that prevents you from pursuing internal opportunities more actively?
Dimension 7: Intent to Stay
- Better internal career opportunities would influence my decision to stay at this company.
- I see realistic growth paths here without having to change employers.
- If I were to leave, limited internal development options would be a key reason. (Yes / Partly / No)
Add-On Block: Questions for Employees Who Have Applied Internally
Employees who have actually been through the application process can evaluate the experience quality most precisely. This separate question block uncovers what's behind the aggregate numbers.
- How did you find out about the internal role? (Talent marketplace / Manager / Colleagues / By chance / Other)
- How clearly was the application process communicated?
- Did you feel treated fairly compared to external candidates?
- How long did the overall process take from initial contact to decision?
- Did you receive qualitative feedback after the process — whether successful or not?
How to Turn Survey Results Into Action
| Low-Scoring Dimension | Typical Diagnosis | Priority Action |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility | Talent marketplace unknown or hard to find | Communication strategy; manager briefings; newsletter integration |
| Fairness | Perception of favoritism; opaque processes | Publish selection criteria; document structured selection processes |
| Manager Support | Managers actively or passively blocking applications | Manager training; set explicit expectations; adjust leadership KPIs |
| Skills Clarity | No skills map; requirements unclear | Introduce competency framework; add skill tags to job postings |
| Psychological Safety | Culture of loyalty pressure; fear of rejection | Leadership coaching; culture work; make role models visible |
| Intent to Stay | Internal options not seen as an alternative to leaving | Career path visualization; proactive development conversations |
Survey Design: Practical Recommendations
The best question set won't help if the survey design itself reduces participation. Key design principles:
- Cap total length: 15–20 Likert items plus 3–5 open questions is a realistic scope for an annual survey. Pulse surveys (semi-annual or quarterly) should take no more than five minutes.
- Build in segmentation: Separate blocks for employees who have already applied internally — their experience is qualitatively different.
- Guarantee and communicate anonymity: Without credible anonymization, employees won't be honest about their managers.
- Feed results back: After each survey round, communicate what you learned and what will change. This closes the trust loop.
FAQ: Common Questions About Talent Marketplace Surveys
Who should be included in the survey?
Everyone — not just those who have already applied internally. Visibility and fairness perceptions are especially revealing among employees who haven't used the system yet. Add a separate block for actual internal movers to capture the process experience.
How often should this type of survey be run?
Recommendation: once a year as a full survey, supplemented by a short pulse (3–5 questions) after major program updates or communication campaigns. This lets you measure whether specific improvements are actually working.
What's the difference between a talent marketplace survey and a general employee survey?
General employee surveys measure satisfaction, engagement, and leadership quality — typically at a broad level. A talent marketplace survey goes deeper into a specific process and system: Do employees know what's on offer? Do they trust the process? Are they using it? That specificity is what makes actionable diagnosis possible.
What should we do if results show that managers are actively blocking internal mobility?
This is the most common and most critical finding. Manager resistance is usually structural — no easy backfill, no incentive to "lose" a high performer. The solution isn't appeals; it's incentive redesign: make mobility-friendly behavior part of leadership KPIs, define succession planning as a leadership responsibility, and speed up backfill processes to reduce the perceived cost of releasing talent.
How many participants do we need for reliable results?
From around 50 respondents, segment-level patterns start to emerge. For smaller organizations, supplement quantitative results with structured interviews — especially for the Move Experience and Psychological Safety dimensions, which benefit from narrative context.
Jürgen Ulbrich
Jürgen Ulbrich has more than a decade of experience in developing and leading high-performing teams and companies. As an expert in employee referral programs as well as feedback and performance processes, Jürgen has helped over 100 organizations optimize their talent acquisition and development strategies.
