Member-only story
The Problem With Gap Analysis Is the Question It Never Asks
Gap analysis is one of the most widely used frameworks in organizational consulting. The premise is intuitive: assess the distance between where an organization is and where it needs to be, then design interventions to close the gap.
And for decades, this framing has gone largely unquestioned — which is itself worth examining, because the question “how large is the gap?” contains an embedded assumption that deserves considerably more scrutiny than it typically receives.
It assumes that gaps are primarily a function of insufficient capability, inadequate performance, or incomplete development. It locates the problem in what is missing from people — their skills, their engagement, their resilience, their readiness — rather than in the organizational conditions surrounding the people responsible for delivering results. Gap analysis, in its conventional form, is a diagnostic framework designed to measure human deficiency. And it has been deployed in millions of organizations with the unexamined confidence of a tool that seems neutral because it has always been there.
It is not neutral. No diagnostic framework is.
The conditions under which people work — the clarity or confusion surrounding their roles, the safety or fear shaping their communication, the coherence or…
