The Skills Gap in Banking: Where Upskilling Matters Most

The skills gap in banking is the difference between the capabilities a role requires and those a professional can confidently apply at work. It can emerge when responsibilities change, new systems are introduced or familiar procedures no longer provide enough guidance. Upskilling matters most where that gap affects important decisions, the effectiveness of controls or the service customers receive.

The pressure is widespread. An IBM Institute for Business Value 2026 outlook found that 71% of banking executives report talent deficiencies, yet only 8% of banks have a strategic approach to AI. Mercer notes that around 150 banks compete for talent in the GCC, with rising demand for machine learning, AI and data analytics skills. A Quess Corp report on India's banking, financial services and insurance global capability centres found gaps of roughly 38 to 42 per cent in AI and data roles. That finding describes those centres specifically and is not a measure of every bank, but the direction is consistent across markets.

Recruitment can bring new expertise into a bank, but existing employees also need opportunities to develop. For organisations considering banking training courses, the starting point should be the work people perform and the responsibilities they need to fulfil more effectively.

Where Should Banks Prioritise Upskilling?

A skills gap does not always indicate missing knowledge. An employee may understand a policy yet struggle to apply it when information is incomplete. Another may produce accurate calculations without explaining what they mean for a decision.

Three questions help banks determine where development deserves attention:

1. What are the consequences of the gap? Consider its potential effect on customers, financial decisions and control responsibilities.
2. How are the role's demands changing? Identify what employees must do differently as systems, requirements or customer needs evolve.
3. Can the expertise be recruited? Assess whether internal development, external hiring or a combination offers the most suitable response.

Applied to most banks, these questions tend to point first to digital and data capability, then to risk and compliance, credit and lending, and managers, with operations and customer-facing roles following. Treat this as a starting point and not a fixed rule: each bank should test it against evidence from its own workforce and operations.

Training Courses to Elevate Banking Skills

Digital and Data Roles: Questioning Outputs and Understanding Limitations

Digital capability extends beyond knowing how to operate a system. Professionals also need to understand whether the information it produces is reliable and appropriate for the decision being made.

Banks should distinguish between specialists who build models and employees who use their outputs. Technical specialists need to strengthen how they explain assumptions, assess data quality and communicate limitations. Users need to recognise unexpected results and understand when further checks are necessary.

Where AI tools are involved, employees should follow the institution's requirements for permitted use and verification. Managers approving work also need enough understanding to ask informed questions. Familiarity with a tool should be supported by judgement about its outputs.

Risk and Compliance Roles: Making Requirements Actionable

Risk and compliance professionals may understand a requirement while finding it harder to explain how colleagues should apply it. Development needs often emerge in the transition from specialist knowledge to practical advice.

For example, an operational team may seek guidance on a situation that its procedure does not fully address. A useful response explains the concern, identifies the relevant considerations and clarifies what should happen next. Repeating policy wording alone may leave the question unresolved.

Upskilling can strengthen interpretation, constructive challenge and the communication of well-supported decisions. Training, supervised experience and feedback should reflect the responsibilities assigned to the role and the weaknesses identified by the institution.

Credit and Lending Roles: Explaining the Reasoning Behind Recommendations

Credit professionals need to assess evidence, challenge assumptions and explain how uncertainty affects a recommendation. Accurate calculations are important, but they do not provide a complete assessment.

A borrower's reported performance may appear strong while questions remain about cash generation or forecast reliability. An analyst should be able to identify those questions and explain what further information would support a decision.

Development priorities may involve deeper modelling skills, stronger analytical judgement or clearer written recommendations. Repeated requests for clarification during approval can help managers identify which capability needs attention.

Managers: Diagnosing Needs and Giving Useful Feedback

Promotion can create a capability gap for experienced banking professionals. Reviewing others' work, allocating responsibilities and coaching colleagues require skills that differ from strong individual performance.

Managers need to distinguish between limited capability, unclear expectations and weak processes. Otherwise, they may prescribe training when employees actually need clearer guidance or authority.

Specific feedback makes development actionable. "Improve your analysis" offers little direction. Explaining which conclusion lacked evidence or which assumption needed testing gives the employee a clear improvement to work towards.

Banking Operations: Handling Exceptions and Improving Handovers

Accuracy, speed and adherence to procedures are useful performance measures. They do not fully reveal whether employees understand why a control exists or how to respond when the normal process breaks down.

A professional may handle routine requests reliably yet struggle with incomplete instructions or conflicting records. Development can strengthen exception handling, investigation and the ability to provide complete handovers.

However, recurring problems should not automatically be treated as training needs. Unclear procedures and unreliable systems also require attention. Building employee capability should support improvements to the process itself.

Customer-Facing Roles: Developing Better Customer Conversations

Customer-facing professionals need product understanding alongside clear communication and sound judgement. They must recognise the purpose of a request, identify missing information and know when specialist advice is necessary.

For example, a relationship manager discussing additional funding with a business customer should explore the reasons behind the request. Recording the amount alone may leave the credit team without important context.

Relevant development can strengthen questioning, clear explanations, accurate records and timely escalation. These roles should be prioritised according to their customer responsibilities and evidence of where performance needs to improve.

Turning Development Needs into Measurable Improvement

Once a gap is identified, define the expected improvement precisely. "Strengthen credit capability" is too broad to guide course selection. "Improve how cash-flow assumptions are assessed and explained in lending recommendations" provides a clearer objective.

Managers and learning and development teams should agree on the task that needs to improve, the evidence of the gap and the capability required afterwards. They can then compare course objectives with those needs.

Learning also requires opportunities for workplace application and supervisor feedback. Clearer recommendations, more complete handovers or better-supported escalations can provide evidence of progress.

Building Capability Where It Matters Most

The skills gap in banking varies across roles and institutions. Effective development focuses on responsibilities where stronger capability can improve important decisions or resolve recurring difficulties.

For teams matching learning objectives with identified needs, GLOMACS banking and financial regulation training courses provide a practical starting point. Relevant learning, clear expectations and support at work help turn professional development into more consistent performance.