Career Development

How to Identify the Skills You Need for Your Next Career Move

The skills required for a promotion, a lateral move, and a full career pivot are rarely the same list, even when they all get filed under the same generic advice: "build your skills." Before figuring out what to learn, it helps to figure out what kind of move is actually being made — because that, more than anything else, determines which skills genuinely matter and which ones are a distraction.

Why move type matters The four move types Where to find real signal Transferable vs. new Validate before committing FAQ

Why the Type of Move Changes Everything

"What skills do I need" is really shorthand for a more specific question that depends on two things: is the move staying within the same function or crossing into a different one, and is it staying at the same level or reaching for a higher one. Those two questions define four genuinely different situations, each demanding a different kind of preparation. Treating all four the same way — with a generic list of "in-demand skills" — is one of the most common reasons career preparation ends up misdirected.

The Four Move Types, and What Each One Actually Demands

The matrix above lays out the four combinations directly. A promotion — same function, higher level — generally rewards deepening existing expertise rather than acquiring an entirely new skill set; the core competency is already right, it needs to go further. A lateral move — same level, different function — usually asks for adjacent skills that broaden what you can do without discarding what already works, since much of the existing skill set genuinely transfers. A pivot — different function, same level — often requires building foundational skills in a new area close to from scratch, since less of the existing expertise directly applies. The hardest quadrant, a bigger leap combining a different function with a higher level, typically demands both a new domain and new leadership skill simultaneously, which is exactly why this kind of move tends to take the longest to prepare for properly.

Where to Find Real Signal, Not Guesswork

Once the move type is clear, the next step is gathering actual evidence of what's required, rather than assuming based on general reputation or secondhand advice:

◐

Real job postings for the target role, read for the specific requirements listed, not just the title — postings reveal what's actually being screened for, not what sounds impressive.

◐

Informational conversations with people already doing the target role — a fifteen-minute conversation often surfaces more accurate, current information than hours of general research.

◐

Internal mobility postings, if the move is within the same organization — these often spell out exactly what's being evaluated for internal candidates specifically.

◐

Professional communities and forums specific to the target field, where practitioners discuss what actually matters day to day, as opposed to what's listed formally.

Separating Transferable Skills From Genuinely New Ones

Once there's a real list of requirements for the target role, sort each item into one of two categories: skills that already exist and simply need repositioning — reframing project management experience for a new industry, for instance — and skills that are genuinely absent and need to be built from a lower starting point. This step matters because it's easy to either overestimate how much transfers (leading to being underprepared) or underestimate it (leading to unnecessary, redundant preparation for something already covered). The four-quadrant matrix above is a useful starting estimate for how much transfer to expect, but the actual list of requirements from the previous step is what confirms it skill by skill.

Validating the List Before Committing Time to It

✕

Reading job postings too literally — a long list of "required" qualifications often reflects an ideal candidate, not a strict minimum, and treating every line as equally mandatory can lead to over-preparing for skills that are actually negotiable.

✕

Relying on a single source for what the role requires — one job posting or one conversation can be unrepresentative; cross-checking two or three sources produces a far more reliable list.

✕

Skipping validation entirely and jumping straight into preparation based on assumption — the fastest way to spend months building the wrong thing.

Before committing significant time to closing any specific skill gap, it's worth running the final list past at least one person genuinely familiar with the target role — a short sanity check that catches misreadings before they cost months.

Frequently Asked Questions

How do I know if my move counts as a pivot or a lateral move?

Ask whether the core function is changing, not just the title or team. If the day-to-day work and required expertise are meaningfully different from the current role, it's closer to a pivot than a lateral move, even if the seniority level stays the same.

Should I take every listed job requirement literally?

No. Many postings list an aspirational full profile rather than a strict minimum. Cross-checking with someone in the role, or with multiple postings for similar roles, gives a more accurate read on what's genuinely required versus what's simply preferred.

What's the fastest way to get reliable information about a target role?

A short, direct conversation with someone already doing the role, if it can be arranged. It tends to surface more accurate and current information in fifteen minutes than hours spent reading general material online.

Is the hardest move always a full pivot?

Not necessarily — a pivot at the same level can draw on some existing habits and professional judgment. The combination that tends to demand the most preparation is changing function and level at the same time, since it requires building both a new domain and new leadership capability at once.

The bottom line

Before building a single skill, it's worth being precise about what kind of move is actually being made — same function or different, same level or higher. That one distinction points directly at whether the work ahead is deepening expertise, broadening adjacent skills, building something foundational, or all of it at once. Skip that step, and even genuinely hard work risks going toward the wrong target.