The recently released Annual Skills Report 2026 by the Financial Services Skills Commission (FSSC) confirms a trend that many organisational development leaders have sensed for years: skills gaps are no longer a static problem to be “solved,” but an ever-evolving target. While the financial services sector saw a 5% contraction in total headcount in 2025, vacancy postings for specialist roles actually increased by 3%.This “hiring grows alongside workforce contraction” paradox is driven by a strong need for talent capable of navigating the disruption brought about by Artificial Intelligence.
This trend aligns with broader global research; for instance, the World Economic Forum has long predicted that while automation may displace routine tasks, it simultaneously heightens the premium on specialised industry expertise and technological fluency.
We are witnessing a structural shift where “hoarding” scarce specialist talent has become a defensive necessity for firms facing rapid digital transformation. This reflects findings from the Bank of England and Morgan McKinley, which show that even as total headcount plans remain flat or decline due to sluggish economic growth, the demand for higher-value positions in IT management, audit, and tax continues to rise.
The data reveals that “human” behaviours are not just complementary but are becoming the essential baseline for survival in a tech-saturated market where generative AI tools are now embedded in daily business processes.

The behavioural shift: adaptability over coaching

For the first time in several years, the “most in-demand” behavioural crown has shifted.

  • Adaptability (The 47% Gap): This is the most in-demand behaviour (69% demand increase) and carries the single largest supply-demand gap in the entire report. It has displaced coaching as the top priority as firms scramble to survive constant technological disruption. Library Resources: Adaptability | Navigating Uncertainty
  • Relationship Management (The 28% Gap): 59% of firms see demand rising, but only 31% see a corresponding rise in supply. It is essential for scaling client offerings and managing complex internal stakes during mergers or restructuring. Library Resources: Interpersonal Savvy | Navigating Stakeholders
  • Coaching (The 15% Gap): While still highly valued (53% demand), it has been nudged out of the top spot by a preference for more “rapid” up-skilling. Firms are moving away from long-term formal re-skilling toward agile, just-in-time development interventions. Library Resources: Coaching | Developing Others
  • Teamwork (The 37% Gap): 50% of firms need more of it, but only 13% report an increase in collaborative supply. It is essential for driving productivity and change in a workforce that is shrinking in size but increasing in role complexity. Library Resources: Building Effective Teams | Fostering Collaboration
  • Creative Thinking (The 28% Gap): Demand stands at 50% as organisations look for novel ways to leverage AI and solve legacy system problems. Firms need people who can think beyond “standard” analysis tasks that are increasingly being automated. Library Resources: Creativity | Innovation
  • Empathy (The 18% Gap): Demand has cooled slightly to 31%, as some firms shift initial customer and employee interactions to AI tools. While AI can assist with sensitive drafting, humans are still required for the complex nuance of high-value roles. Library Resources: Empathy | Compassion

The leadership imperative: Thriving in complexity

The FSSC data underscores a vital reality: in a “moving target” environment, traditional static leadership models are insufficient. To remain competitive, both individuals and organisations must pivot toward two critical areas: Learning Agility and Complexity Leadership.

1. Speed of insight: Learning agility

As the shelf-life of technical skills shrinks, the ability to learn, unlearn, and relearn becomes the ultimate currency. Learning Agility is the willingness and ability to learn from experience and then apply those lessons to succeed in new and first-time conditions. It is the “engine” behind the 69% increase in demand for adaptability noted in this year’s report. Deep Dive: Developing Learning Agility to Stay Relevant

2. Leading Through VUCA: Complexity leadership

We are operating in a VUCA (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous) environment where cause-and-effect is no longer linear. Complexity Leadership moves away from “command and control” and instead focuses on creating the conditions for innovation to emerge. In a sector where 50% of firms are seeking more creative thinking to solve legacy problems, leaders must shift from being “chess players” to “gardeners”, cultivating an ecosystem where teams can navigate ambiguity safely. Deep Dive: Complexity Leadership: Leading in Turbulent Times

By marrying the speed of Learning Agility with the strategic flexibility of Complexity Leadership, finance leaders can transform the “skills gap” from a looming threat into a competitive advantage.

Reflections

The corporate response, while well-intentioned, is not yet matching the scale of the disruption. We are seeing a 5% headcount decline in banking and insurance, yet a “hoarding” of specialists into roles that didn’t exist two years ago, such as AI enablement and cloud engineering. Furthermore, while 70% of the workforce are “active learners,” 30% do not proactively engage beyond mandated compliance training. This suggests that a significant portion of the workforce is at risk of falling behind as the “moving target” of skills accelerates. Strategic workforce planning is now as important for maintaining an early-careers pipeline as for driving large-scale re-skilling.

Reflection questions for finance and people leaders

To navigate this “moving target,” leaders should consider the following:

  1. On strategy alignment: Most firms assess themselves as “emerging” in skills forecasting. Do we truly know which skills we will need in 18 months, or are we simply hiring for today’s fires?
  2. On learning culture: If 30% of our people are only doing mandatory training, what structural barriers (time, cost, or culture) are preventing them from becoming “active learners”?
  3. On technical anxiety: As AI displaces routine tasks, are we training our teams for Adaptability and Sensemaking, or just teaching them how to use specific software?
  4. On internal mobility: Just over half of roles (51%) are filled internally. Is our “skills-based architecture” robust enough to identify hidden talent in our own hallways before looking at the expensive external market?
  5. On early careers: Are we removing degree requirements and focusing on “potential” to widen our talent pool, or are we still using legacy filters that exclude the agile talent we claim to need?

Final thought: There are no real surprises here, but the stakes have changed. The core skills organisations have discussed for years, adaptability, teamwork, and technical agility, are no longer “nice-to-haves.” They are the prerequisites for navigating the 2026 labour market. I am not sure it is Financial Services either!

Reference List

  • Bank of England (2025) Agents’ summary of business conditions – 2025 Q3. Available at: Bank of England Report
  • Department for Education (2023) The impact of AI on UK jobs and training. Available at: GOV.UK Publication
  • Financial Services Skills Commission (2026) Annual Skills Report 2026. Available at: FSSC 2026 Report
  • Morgan McKinley (2025) London Employment Monitor: October 2025. Available at: Morgan McKinley Article
  • World Economic Forum (2023) The Future of Jobs Report 2023. Available at: WEF Report