Area of expertise
Human capital & HR
Advisory and capacity building — Workforce planning · Frameworks · Appraisal · HRIS
Job-competency frameworks, headcount sizing in full-time equivalents, appraisal, classification and talent management. We build the instruments that let an HR department argue its decisions before senior management — and hold them before the social partners.
- Typical duration
- 8 to 16 weeks
- Main deliverable
- Framework + sizing model
- Counterparts
- HR director, management control, line managers
- Handover
- Training of the HR team included
The problem
Almost every HR decision is taken without measurement.
A management asks how many staff are needed to run a service desk. The answer comes back from the field: "we are overwhelmed". It comes back from management control: "the payroll has already risen 6%". Neither is wrong, neither is a figure. The decision is then taken on the balance of power between the two, not on the real workload.
The same mechanism repeats elsewhere. A manager has to appraise an employee with no framework: they assess a person rather than performance in a role. A pay scale is built by comparison with the neighbour rather than by job weighting, and inequity settles in for ten years. A training plan is filled from the requests received, not from the gaps observed — and the organization funds what interests staff rather than what it needs.
These situations have a common cause: there is no shared language to name the work. As long as the job, the activity and the competency are not named the same way by HR, by management control and by managers, no discussion can converge. That is the first thing we build.
A framework is not a compliance document. It is the common dictionary without which no HR decision can be argued.
Warning sign
If your organization cannot answer, in under an hour, the question "how many people do this job and at what level of mastery", the framework is the first project — before any HR software project.
The intervention cycle
Seven steps, two of them specific to this domain.
The two dashed steps vary by domain; the other five are common to all six chains.
- Understand
- Assess
- Consolidate
- Design
- Equip
- Support
- Deploy
Fields of application
Where this domain works in practice.
HR policy & organization
Master plan, workforce planning and structure of the function.
Jobs & skills
Occupational frameworks, job-profile studies and skills reviews.
Recruitment & mobility
Needs definition, assessment of applications, onboarding and career paths.
Outsourced management
Personnel administration, social reporting and operational support entrusted to the firm.
The competency chain
12 competencies, across two axes and a pivot
Axis 1 establishes and measures. Axis 2 builds. The pivot names the point where one turns into the other.
Axis 1
Audit and assessment of the HR function
Establish the real state of the function, the jobs and the skills.
- 01
Audit of the HR function
Organization, processes, tools and compliance of personnel-management practices.
- 02
Analysis of headcount and job structure
Age and tenure pyramids, distribution by unit, inflows and outflows, and associated costs.
- 03
Job-profile studies and skills assessment
The real requirements of jobs and the gaps with the profiles in post, by occupational family.
- 04
Social report and reading of the internal climate
Social indicators, absenteeism, staff turnover and the quality of relations with employee representatives.
- 05
Assessment of the existing HR arrangements
Recruitment, appraisal, pay and training: actual use, ownership and observed effects.
- 06
Participatory feedback and consolidation
Sharing the findings with management and supervisors, and jointly ranking the priorities.
Pivot — from the assessment to the HR policy
Axis 2
Engineering of the HR policy and its arrangements
Turn the diagnosis into frameworks, processes and working tools.
- 07
HR master plan
Orientations, target organization of the HR function and costed multi-year priorities.
- 08
Development of job and skills frameworks
Standard jobs, job descriptions and expected proficiency levels by occupational family.
- 09
Workforce planning
Headcount projection, recruitment plan, internal mobility and succession arrangements.
- 10
Design of HR processes and tools
Recruitment, onboarding, appraisal, pay: procedures, templates and management rules.
- 11
Support for recruitment and onboarding
Needs definition, sourcing of candidates, assessment and follow-up of the first months.
- 12
Outsourced management and skills transfer
Handling of all or part of HR management, with the internal teams building up their own capacity.
Our services
Six services, deployable separately.
Nothing requires committing to everything at once. Most organizations start with the framework or the sizing, then extend once the tool has proven itself.
Online instrument
FTE calculator and 9 Box grid
Estimate in two minutes the headcount an activity needs, or place an employee on the performance-potential grid — free, no commitment.
Use the instrument01
Job & competency framework
The foundation. Mapping of job families, standardized job descriptions, competencies described as observable behaviors rather than qualities.
- Occupational interviews and on-the-job observation
- Graded, illustrated proficiency levels
- Mobility bridges between jobs
- Validation by the managers concerned
02
Headcount sizing (FTE)
Conversion of the real workload into full-time equivalents, activity by activity, with a model your teams update on their own.
- Time measured by observation, not by declaration
- Seasonality and multi-skilling taken into account
- Parameterisable, documented calculation workbook
- Three-year headcount scenarios
03
Performance appraisal
An annual appraisal arrangement genuinely workable by managers who are not appraisal professionals.
- Short, operational interview template
- Training of appraisers, practical cases included
- Handling of disagreements and appeal routes
- Use of the results in committee
04
Talent and succession management
Identification of critical posts and of the people who could hold them tomorrow, using a crossed performance-potential grid.
- 9 Box mapping argued by two appraisers
- Succession plans for key posts
- Individualized development paths
- Annual review in a career committee
05
Classification and pay
Job weighting against explicit criteria, construction of the scales and measurement of internal equity before any pay rise.
- A transparent, defensible weighting method
- Analysis of gaps and atypical situations
- Budget costing of convergence scenarios
- A case for social dialogue
06
Recruitment and external assessment
A structured selection process that reduces the share of impression in a hiring decision.
- Need defined from the framework
- Structured interview guide and scoring grid
- Work-sample exercises
- A first-six-months onboarding path
Typical deliverables
What appears in a proposal — a document, not an intention.
Every deliverable is handed over in an editable format, with its documentation. You are never dependent on the firm to keep it up to date.
- Job-competency framework
- Sizing model
- Appraisal arrangement
- Talent map
- Classification scale
- Handover pack
An example
Framework and FTE model.
- The situation
- A management unable to substantiate its headcount needs before its budget authority, with technical jobs changing fast and no up-to-date framework.
- What we did
- Construction of the occupational framework, measurement of workloads by activity, design of an FTE calculation model and a simulator, interview guides for field collection.
- What was delivered
- An audited and corrected multi-sheet calculation workbook, an interactive simulator, structured interview guides and a summary presentation for senior management.
- What stayed
- The HR team updates the model without us. That is the only success criterion we hold to for this kind of engagement.
A real engagement, presented by sector. The client name is given as a reference in tender submissions, with their written consent.
Timelines and conditions
What to plan for on your side.
Duration. A framework covering three to five job families takes 8 to 12 weeks. Beyond ten families, allow 16 weeks. FTE sizing adds 4 to 6 weeks depending on the number of activities to measure.
Internal availability. This is the variable that makes projects drift, never the method. Plan for a half-time HR contact for the duration, and one hour per manager for the validation interviews. Without that, the framework will be right on paper and wrong on the ground.
Success conditions. An arbiter named in advance to settle scope disagreements; access to payroll and organization data; and announcement of the project to the representative bodies before it starts, never after.
What we refuse. Building a framework meant to justify a headcount cut already decided. The tool then loses all internal credibility, and with it any chance of being used for anything else.
Cost
The price depends on the number of consultant-days, not on the size of your organization. We state the daily rate, the number of days per step and what each step produces. The framing consultation is free.
References for this domain
The organizations that trust us.
32 organizations supported, across every sector.
TOURBA
Mediouna Services S.A — شركة التنمية مديونة خدمات ش.م
Ministère de l'Équipement et du Transport — Royaume du Maroc
Ministère de la Fonction Publique et de la Modernisation de l'Administration
Ministère de l'Habitat, de l'Urbanisme et de la Politique de la Ville
Conseil National des Droits de l'Homme (CNDH)
Agence Nationale pour le Développement de l'Aquaculture (ANDA)
Zoo de Rabat
District Autonome d'Abidjan
UNESCO
Coopération allemande — Deutsche Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)
BTC–CTB, Belgian Development Agency
FDFP — Fonds de Développement de la Formation Professionnelle (Côte d'Ivoire)
Institut Français Casablanca
Campus Veolia Environnement
Amendis
Redal
RADEEL — Régie de distribution d'eau et d'électricité, Larache
TAQA Morocco
JESA
Webhelp
Philip Morris International
SIANA — maintenance des rames à grande vitesse
Altadis
CFR
DIRA — Dirafrost
Groupe Maroc Soir
Global Media Strategic Consulting
Med Radio
Fondation Zakoura
Zakoura Academy
Fondation Wasl wa Idmaj
Our services
11 services, available separately
- Recruitment Advisory / Talent ManagementStrategic recruitment advisory: assessing whether recruiting is the right move, defining profiles and structuring a sustainable talent management policy.
- Human ResourcesSupport for the HR function: recruitment, skills management, HRIS and compensation policy.
- Outsourced HR ManagementOutsourcing of all or part of the HR function: personnel administration, payroll and social reporting, with a compliance commitment.
- Workload diagnosis and analysisObjective measurement of headcount needs per entity, calculation of Full-Time Equivalents (FTE) and identification of the gaps between available resources and real workload, supported by fit-for-purpose simulation tools.
- Structure sizing and optimizationDefining the right headcount against missions, processes and strategic objectives, with proposed target-organization scenarios and convergence paths.
- Job evaluation and classificationMethodical evaluation of positions against weighted criteria (responsibility, technical difficulty, autonomy, interpersonal demands), producing a job map and a coherent classification grid — the guarantee of internal equity.
- HR Master Plan (Schéma Directeur des Ressources Humaines, SDRH)Building a multi-year, integrated vision of the HR function, connecting the organization’s strategic direction with the levers of recruitment, mobility, training and skills development.
- Workforce and skills forecasting (GPEC)Anticipating quantitative and qualitative headcount needs, modeling flows (joiners, leavers, internal moves) and building target trajectories over the short, medium and long term.
- Workforce redeployment planDesigning reallocation and internal-mobility schemes to close identified gaps (over- and under-staffing), make the most of existing skills and support professional transitions.
- Succession planning and talent managementIdentifying key positions, mapping internal talent pools and securing succession, so that operations continue and the risk of a strategic vacancy stays under control.
- Recruitment planTranslating headcount needs into structured, prioritized recruitment programs, tied to budget direction, target skills and the organization’s deadlines.
Frequently asked questions
How long does it take to build a framework?
From 8 to 16 weeks depending on the number of job families and the managers' availability for the validation interviews. The method is almost never the limiting factor; the managers' diaries always are.
Do you need an HRIS to manage competencies?
No. A framework kept in a well-built workbook works better than software fed with wrong data. The tool comes after the method, never before — and we sell no software, which makes our view on the subject easier to believe.
Must the framework be negotiated with the social partners?
Describing jobs is a matter of work organization, not negotiation. But anything touching classification and pay leads there. Experience shows that a framework presented to the bodies while it is being built goes through; presented at the end, it gets contested.
How do you make sure the framework is not obsolete in two years?
Through an update procedure built into the deliverable: who triggers the revision, how often, who validates. It is three pages of operating procedure, and it is what separates a living framework from an archive document.
The firm's instruments
Tools that work, not a brochure.
These are simplified versions of instruments we build for our clients. Use them here, with your own figures, before deciding to talk to us.
TOOL 01
HR maturity diagnostic
Six questions, four tiers, one priority lever.
Answer six simple questions. The diagnostic places your HR function on one of four tiers and names the lever to engage first.
Does your organization have an up-to-date job and competency framework?
This result rests on a few simplified assumptions. An on-site engagement measures the real situation, accounts for your statutory constraints, and produces tools your teams then use on their own.
Nothing is transmitted or stored. These tools run entirely in your browser.
TOOL 02
FTE calculator
How many people does this activity actually require?
Enter the volume of a repetitive activity and the average time it takes. The tool does not return a single figure: it breaks the sizing into four decisions — gross workload, service quality, fragmentation, peak period — so every FTE requested can be defended line by line.
Building the model
9.4
Full-time equivalents required
- Gross workload8.0
- Service quality+1.49.4
- Fragmentation9.4
- Peak period+2.812.3
Our reading
Apparent overstaffing of 4.6 FTE. Before concluding, check the activities this calculation does not measure — the non-dedicated share of time covers some of them.
At 57 % occupancy, the average wait is around 1.3 times the handling time — a regime that absorbs variability without a permanent queue.
Most sensitive driver: transaction volume. A 1 % error on it moves the result by 1.0 %. Measure that one first.
The queueing figure assumes standard variability in arrivals and handling times (Ca² = Cs² = 1); scheduled work is more forgiving, an unscheduled counter less so. Above all, the result is only worth what the average handling time is worth: an engagement validates it by on-site observation, never by declaration.
Nothing is transmitted or stored. These tools run entirely in your browser.
TOOL 03
9 Box grid
Performance × potential, and the decision that follows.
Cross observed performance with assessed potential. Select a cell to see the decision it calls for. This is the instrument used in a career committee.
Potential ↑
Performance →low → high
Select a cell of the grid to display the reading and the decision it calls for.
A grid decides nothing on its own. A placement must be argued between at least two assessors, reviewed annually, and never communicated to the person as a label.
Nothing is transmitted or stored. These tools run entirely in your browser.
TOOL 04
NAITECH Consult · Training engineering
Build the technical file for your CSF training plan.
Answer a guided path following the GIAC / OFPPT circuit for the Special Training Contract, with the DACUM/PPM engineering that ranks needs. We turn your answers into a complete technical file — which we finalize and hand over, ready to file.
- 01
You answer a guided 7-step path, about 25 minutes.
- 02
DACUM/PPM engineering ranks your needs task by task.
- 03
You review a summary and receive a quote within 48 working hours.
- 04
After payment, NAITECH finalises and hands over the technical file.
The final document is neither generated nor downloadable directly from this path. Your answers are the raw material of the file; NAITECH Consult drafts it, formats it and hands it over once the quote is accepted and the service is paid.
TOOL 05
Training evaluation · Kirkpatrick model
Four levels, one causal chain, the link that breaks.
Demonstration on a fictitious action: “Front-line management”, 12 team leaders at a Moroccan industrial company. Pick a scenario or change the values: the tool recalculates the four levels, locates the break, proposes levers and detects new training needs. Everything stays in your browser.
Evaluation data
1 · Reaction
2 · Learning
3 · Behavior
4 · Results
| Organizational indicators | Before | After | Target |
|---|---|---|---|
| Team absenteeism | 7.2% | 5.5% | |
| Annual staff turnover | 14% | 10% | |
| Production deadlines met | 86% | 93% | |
| Annual reviews completed | 55% | 90% |
Targeted competencies (self-rating 0–4)
- 1. Leading the team
- 2. Setting and tracking goals
- 3. Running reviews, giving feedback
- 4. Handling tension and conflict
- 5. Delegating and empowering
- 6. Organizing work and priorities
Results
1 · Reaction
85
Strong
Did participants value the training and find it useful?
2 · Learning
62
Fragile
Did they actually acquire the targeted knowledge and skills?
3 · Behavior
41
Broken
Do they apply what they learned on the job, three to six months later?
4 · Results
12
Broken
Did the organization’s indicators move?
Calculation: level 1 = mean of the three measures; level 2 = normalized gain (after − before) / (100 − before); level 3 = application observed by managers; level 4 = mean share of the gap to target closed on each indicator. Thresholds: strong ≥ 70, fragile ≥ 50, broken < 50.
Where the chain breaks
Break at level 3: learned, but not applied on the job
Participants learned, but on-the-job application stays low. The problem is not the training: it is the work environment (manager, time, tools, organization). Repeating the same training would change nothing.
30-point gap between reported and observed application: self-reported level 3 overstates transfer. Rely on the managers’ observation.
Levers for action
- 01
Address the reported barriers below first, with the line managers.
- 02
Set up an individual post-training action plan, reviewed at 30 and 90 days.
- 03
Train managers to support transfer (the “sponsor” role).
- 04
Involve managers: briefing before the session, application goals agreed together, a 30-day follow-up.
- 05
Schedule application time (team rituals, dedicated slots) rather than adding it on top of the workload.
This diagnosis, on your own training
This demonstration runs on fictitious data. On your actions, NAITECH deploys the questionnaires, collects answers from participants and their managers, and delivers the diagnosis. Choose the offer that fits your need: the quote is issued within 5 days.
Before 1.5After 2.7
- 1. Leading the team · Maintain
- 2. Setting and tracking goals · Maintain
- 3. Running reviews, giving feedback · Maintain
- 4. Handling tension and conflict · Maintain
- 5. Delegating and empowering · Monitor
- 6. Organizing work and priorities · Monitor
New training needs
- Delegating and empoweringAfter 2/4 · Importance 2/4 → Self-study resources
- Organizing work and prioritiesAfter 2/4 · Importance 2/4 → Self-study resources
Written summary
On the Kirkpatrick chain, the action scores 85/100 for reaction, 62/100 for learning (normalized gain), 41/100 for observed application and 12/100 for results. Break at level 3: learned, but not applied on the job. Participants learned, but on-the-job application stays low. The problem is not the training: it is the work environment (manager, time, tools, organization). Repeating the same training would change nothing. Average mastery of the targeted competencies rises from 1.5 to 2.7 out of 4. 30-point gap between reported and observed application: self-reported level 3 overstates transfer. Rely on the managers’ observation. Priority needs to schedule: delegating and empowering and organizing work and priorities.
Demonstration on fictitious data. In a real assignment, level 2 relies on an automatically scored test (never a self-declared score), level 3 combines the participant’s self-assessment with their manager’s observation, and attributing level 4 results to the training remains a hypothesis to support (control group, prior trend). Reference: D. L. Kirkpatrick and J. D. Kirkpatrick, four-level model.
Nothing is transmitted or stored. These tools run entirely in your browser.
TOOL 06
AI governance diagnostic
Eight controls, priority risks, and the owners to involve.
Assess practices actually in place, not intentions. Each answer helps identify controls to strengthen. The diagnostic stays entirely in your browser.
What is the context of your AI use?
Indicative self-assessment based on your answers, without an evidence audit. This NAITECH score is not a certification, compliance assessment, or deployment authorization. Risks and obligations require review for each use case. Methodological reference: NIST AI RMF, a voluntary framework.
Nothing is transmitted or stored. These tools run entirely in your browser.
TOOL 07
AI maturity diagnostic
Six pillars, 29 capabilities, and an evidence-informed improvement plan.
NAITECH adaptation of UNESCO’s framework (2025), designed for public administrations. Businesses can also use this exploratory path by adapting it to their context. Select your typical current practice, then a realistic target for your organization.
Do not include names, personal data, or confidential documents in your notes.
Pillar 1/6 · 0/29 capabilities assessed
Strategy and value
How do I choose a level?
- 1. Basic: occasional or undocumented practices
- 2. Ready: documented, repeatable practices within a team
- 3. Dynamic: shared practices, consistently applied and measured
- 4. Advanced: continuous improvement informed by results
These prompts are simplified. Consult the corresponding section of the original guide for detailed criteria.
Source: UNESCO (2025), AI Maturity Framework: A self-positioning guide for public administrations. Stratejai (Stefano Sedola, Andrea Pescino, Enrico Sartor). Pathway, translations, and calculations adapted by NAITECH. Original English guide preserved unchanged. CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO.
Self-reported positioning, without an audit or UNESCO endorsement. Indicative pillar averages are a NAITECH summary with equal category weights, not a UNESCO certification rule. The lowest level remains visible: an average does not compensate for a missing safeguard. No universal target level is imposed.
Nothing is transmitted or stored. These tools run entirely in your browser.
The other practices
Training engineering
Master plan · Programs · Evaluation
Management consulting
Processes · Change · Risk · Service quality
Local governance
Local authorities · PPP · Procurement · Territories
Social, legal & labor-relations compliance
Employment law · Social dialogue · Audit
Governance of artificial intelligence
Dashboards · Simulators · AI governance
Let's talk about your project
Human capital, training, organization, governance, compliance or artificial intelligence — our teams support you in Morocco and internationally.