Competency frameworks often fail to live up to their promise. They can be vague, overly complex, or disconnected from the day to day work people actually do. Yet when they are designed with intent and discipline, they provide clarity on the skills and behaviours that matter most.
A recent study on medical affairs professionals offers a rare example of how to apply best practice in this space. The framework they produced is less important than the way they went about creating it. For HR and people leaders, that process holds valuable lessons and a few warnings.
What they got right
The design process for this framework followed a sequence that too many organisations skip. First, the researchers defined a very clear purpose. This was not a general capability model but one built to reflect the increasing global complexity and compliance demands facing medical affairs. That clarity ensured every element of the framework had a reason for being there.
Second, the work drew on a broad set of voices. Industry professionals were included alongside academic experts, which helped bridge the gap between theory and practice. Many HR led frameworks fail because they are created in isolation, without input from those who will actually use them.
Finally, the framework was validated and refined before publication. Surveys, expert panels and comparisons with existing frameworks were used to stress test the content. That step, often skipped in corporate projects, makes the difference between a document that looks polished and a model that can withstand scrutiny.
Where the risks remain
Even with these strengths, the framework shows where competency models can stumble. The most obvious risk is complexity. With multiple domains, competencies and behavioural indicators, the model is thorough but potentially overwhelming for managers and employees. Without careful translation, it risks being too dense to apply in practice.
Another challenge is integration. A framework only creates value when it influences job design, performance conversations and career development pathways. Without strong adoption mechanisms, even the most rigorous model remains unused.
Finally, no framework is static. Medical affairs will continue to evolve as AI, regulation and patient expectations reshape the profession. Unless there is a governance process to refresh the framework, it will date quickly and lose the very relevance it set out to achieve.
Lessons for HR leaders
This case provides a useful checklist for anyone developing or refreshing competencies in their organisation:
- Start with a clearly defined purpose tied to business needs
- Involve both experts and frontline practitioners in the design
- Validate content through pilots, surveys and iteration
- Keep the framework usable by balancing detail with simplicity
- Establish governance to review and refresh over time
The study shows what is possible when best practice is applied. But it also highlights the discipline required to keep frameworks alive. For HR leaders, the message is clear: do not just design competencies, design them to last.