8607-505 Assignment Example

Managing individual development is about closing the gap between where someone is and where they need to be — systematically, not by guesswork. Unit 8607-505 requires you to diagnose performance gaps using evidence-based assessment, select appropriate development interventions, and evaluate whether those interventions produced the intended improvement.

This assignment example follows an IT service delivery manager in a 180-person managed services company, developing a team of eight service desk analysts whose technical knowledge needs to expand as the company transitions from reactive break-fix support to proactive managed services.

Learning Outcome 1 — Understand How to Assess the Development Needs of Individuals

AC 1.1 — Conduct a Performance Gap Analysis for an Individual

A performance gap analysis for one service desk analyst (Analyst C) was conducted using three data sources. Competency framework assessment: the company’s technical competency matrix rates analysts across 12 domains on a 1-4 scale (1=awareness, 2=practitioner, 3=proficient, 4=expert). Analyst C scored at level 2 or below in three domains critical to the managed services transition: network monitoring (1), security incident response (1), and proactive systems health checking (2). These three domains are classified as ‘essential’ for the new service model — the gap is therefore business-critical, not merely developmental. Call resolution data: Analyst C resolves 78% of tickets at first contact — above the 75% team target. However, 92% of her resolutions are in traditional break-fix categories; she has resolved zero proactive monitoring alerts because she lacks the skills to interpret monitoring dashboard data. One-to-one development conversation: Analyst C is aware of the gap and expressed anxiety about the transition: ‘I’m good at fixing things when they break, but I don’t understand the monitoring tools well enough to spot problems before they happen.’ Her self-assessment aligns with the data, confirming that the gap is a capability issue rather than a motivation or attitude issue (CIPD, 2024).

AC 1.2 — Evaluate the Factors Affecting Individual Development

Four factors affect Analyst C’s development trajectory. Learning style: she is a pragmatist (Honey and Mumford framework) — she learns best through practical application rather than classroom theory. Previous formal training courses produced limited transfer to the workplace; hands-on lab exercises produced immediate skill application. Workload constraints: the service desk operates at full capacity — releasing Analyst C for full-day training disrupts service levels. Development activities must integrate with operational work rather than replacing it. Confidence: her anxiety about the transition suggests that development must build confidence alongside competence — coaching approaches that celebrate progress are more appropriate than assessment-heavy approaches that amplify the sense of inadequacy. Organisational investment: the company has allocated a £2,400 per-person development budget for the managed services transition, which constrains the options to methods within this budget (Marchington and Kynighou, 2024).