Domain G: Workforce & Culture¶
Using the domain reference
Domain G includes the five maturity descriptors and the source-verified minimum evidence for L3–L5. Expand the evidence section beneath each indicator and retain an auditable assessment record. See How to Apply HDRL.
Focus: Human capacity, capability, and culture
Indicators: 7 (4 Core, 3 Enhancement)
The business question
Do we have the people to run this? Identifies critical skill gaps in engineering and artificial intelligence (AI).
The UK faces an acute shortage of data engineers, research software engineers, and information governance specialists. Many health data services depend on a small number of key individuals with no succession planning. This domain assesses workforce capacity, retention, professionalisation, and whether the organisational culture supports service delivery and cross-boundary collaboration.
Indicator Summary¶
| ID | Indicator | Type | Class | Unit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G.1.1 | Staff Capacity | Core | B0 | Both |
| G.1.2 | Staff Retention & Development | Enhancement | O | Both |
| G.1.3 | Strategic Workforce Planning | Enhancement | O | Both |
| G.2.1 | Role Definition & Professionalization | Core | B0 | Both |
| G.2.2 | Technical Skills | Core | B0 | Both |
| G.3.1 | Service Orientation | Core | B0 | Service |
| G.3.2 | Collaboration & Knowledge Sharing | Enhancement | O | Both |
G.1 — Capacity & Retention¶
G.1.1 Staff Capacity¶
CORE · B0 · Both
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | Critical shortages. Key roles vacant. Insufficient. High temp reliance. |
| L2 | Challenges identified. Recruitment underway. Below requirements. |
| L3 | Adequate for core. Constraints in peak/specialist. Vacancy <15%. |
| L4 | Meets requirements with headroom. Vacancy <10%. Planning enables recruitment. |
| L5 | Optimal with strategic capacity. Vacancy <5%. Strong pipeline. Flexible surge. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Staffing baseline and vacancy metrics documented
- Evidence capacity is sufficient for delivery of core services (throughput vs staffing)
L4 minimum evidence
- Workforce plan and org chart showing staffing meets requirements with headroom
- Vacancy and recruitment metrics showing <10% vacancy rate (or equivalent)
- Evidence of capability to manage peaks (rota/surge plan, prioritisation)
L5 minimum evidence
- Vacancy metrics showing <5% and evidence of stable pipeline (talent pathways)
- Evidence of surge capacity/flex (cross-training, partnerships, reserve staff)
- Retention/engagement evidence supporting sustained capacity
G.1.2 Staff Retention & Development¶
ENHANCEMENT · O · Both
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | High turnover. Limited development. Knowledge lost. |
| L2 | Concerns identified. Opportunities expanding. Exit interviews informing. |
| L3 | Moderate (<20% turnover). Pathways exist. Some progression. |
| L4 | Good (<15%). Clear pathways. Regular review. Succession identified. Satisfaction surveyed. |
| L5 | Excellent (<10%). Employer of choice. Comprehensive development. Alumni network. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Turnover tracked with basic development offer documented
- Evidence of mitigation actions for retention risks
L4 minimum evidence
- Turnover metrics showing <15% with breakdown by role
- Career pathways and development offer evidence (CPD plans, training records)
- Staff satisfaction survey results and actions
L5 minimum evidence
- Turnover metrics <10% sustained with progression evidence
- Evidence of employer-of-choice practices (benefits, recognition, development)
- Knowledge management practices limiting loss (handover, documentation audits)
G.1.3 Strategic Workforce Planning¶
ENHANCEMENT · O · Both
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | No planning. Reactive recruitment. No future view. |
| L2 | Planning initiated. Workforce profiled. Requirements scoped. |
| L3 | Basic 1-2 year plan. Key gaps identified. Annual review. |
| L4 | Comprehensive 3+ years aligned to strategy. Scenario planning. Pipeline development. |
| L5 | Sophisticated with workforce as asset. Long-term pipelines. Integrated with financial. Contributing nationally. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Workforce plan exists linking roles to expected demand
- Evidence of recruitment/training pipeline actions underway
L4 minimum evidence
- 3+ year workforce plan aligned to strategy with scenario elements
- Pipeline development evidence (training partnerships, apprenticeships)
- Annual review evidence and tracked delivery against plan
L5 minimum evidence
- Long-term pipeline evidence (multi-year agreements, national programmes)
- Workforce treated as strategic asset (investment cases, metrics)
- Contribution to wider workforce standards/initiatives (optional)
G.2 — Professionalization¶
G.2.1 Role Definition & Professionalization¶
CORE · B0 · Both
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | Undefined. Staff outside competencies. No framework. |
| L2 | Definitions developing. Frameworks reviewed. Gap analysis. |
| L3 | Key roles defined. Framework for some. Job families emerging. |
| L4 | Comprehensive aligned to DDaT/SFIA. All mapped. Competency informs development. |
| L5 | Mature professional workforce. Contributing to standards. Recognised leader. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Role definitions documented with basic competency expectations
- Evidence roles are used for recruitment/performance management
L4 minimum evidence
- Role framework mapped to DDaT/SFIA (or equivalent) across all roles
- Job families and competency-based development evidence
- Evidence recruitment and performance processes use the framework
L5 minimum evidence
- Evidence of mature professionalisation (certifications, progression, community leadership)
- Contribution to sector standards/job families (optional)
- External recognition evidence (awards, invitations, benchmarking)
G.2.2 Technical Skills¶
CORE · B0 · Both
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | Critical gaps (engineering, governance, analysis, AI/ML). Limited specialist access. |
| L2 | Assessment completed. Priority training. Development underway. Gaps remain. |
| L3 | Core skills present. Development programme. Specialists via partnerships. |
| L4 | Comprehensive across engineering, governance, security, analysis, data science/AI. Skills matrix. CPD. |
| L5 | Advanced including AI/ML, federated, PETs. Contributing to standards. Attracts talent. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Skills coverage assessed (skills matrix) with identified gaps
- Evidence of training/contracting to address gaps
L4 minimum evidence
- Skills matrix covering engineering, governance, security, analysis, data science/AI
- Evidence of training/CPD and specialist access where required
- Assessment evidence showing coverage of required competencies
L5 minimum evidence
- Evidence of advanced capability (PETs, federation, AI/ML) with applied projects
- Evidence of attracting/retaining talent (offers, partnerships, fellowships)
- Contribution to standards or shared training materials (optional)
G.3 — Culture¶
G.3.1 Service Orientation¶
CORE · B0 · Service
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | "Computer says no". Requests as burden. Defensive. |
| L2 | Improvement priority. Feedback collected. Culture change initiated. |
| L3 | Improving. Feedback reviewed. Some embrace service culture. |
| L4 | Embedded. Needs prioritised. "How can we help?" Satisfaction tracked. Standards published. |
| L5 | Exemplary with proactive engagement. Empowered staff. Continuous improvement. Externally recognised. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Service standards and targets defined with evidence of delivery for some
- Evidence of service mindset (feedback loops, issue resolution)
L4 minimum evidence
- Service standards published + evidence of adherence (tickets, SLAs, metrics)
- User satisfaction survey results and improvement actions
- Evidence of service culture embedded (training, leadership messages, behaviours)
L5 minimum evidence
- External recognition or benchmarking of service quality (awards, comparisons)
- Evidence of proactive engagement and continuous improvement (roadmap, releases)
- Sustained high satisfaction results with methodology documented
G.3.2 Collaboration & Knowledge Sharing¶
ENHANCEMENT · O · Both
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | Siloed. Limited collaboration. Knowledge held by individuals. |
| L2 | Improvement identified. Knowledge management started. Cross-team emerging. |
| L3 | Regular cross-team. Knowledge documented. Some external collaboration. |
| L4 | Strong collaborative culture. Communities of practice. Knowledge accessible. UK/international networks. |
| L5 | Collaborative leadership. Anchors networks. Knowledge flows. Attracts opportunities. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Knowledge sharing mechanisms exist (communities, docs) with participation evidence
- Evidence of collaboration supporting delivery (shared artefacts, joint work)
L4 minimum evidence
- Communities of practice/knowledge base evidence + participation records
- Knowledge management artefacts (wikis, SOP repositories) with usage stats
- Evidence of UK/international network participation
L5 minimum evidence
- Evidence of leadership in collaboration networks (hosting, chairing, outputs)
- Cross-organisational knowledge sharing outputs (toolkits, templates)
- Measured improvement in delivery attributable to collaboration (optional)