Quick Answer
Skills audit (edit step 4) automation rules can assign a follow-up assessment or learning path automatically once a Skills audit is submitted, based on ANY or AVERAGE logic applied with an operator (≥, ≤, =) to User, Manager, or combined ratings; this article covers how to structure those rules strategically, and assumes you've already set up Step 4 automation itself.
What This Article Helps With
This article explains the rule types available for Step 4 automation on a Skills audit, and offers suggested approaches for structuring rules and audits so automated assignments stay meaningful and scalable. It applies to Assignment Administrators and Assignors. If you haven't configured Step 4 automation before, see the introductory article on this feature first - this one builds on it rather than explaining it from scratch.
Overview
Automation rules assign follow-up assessments automatically after a Skills audit is submitted. Used strategically, this acts as a filtering system - grouping users by skill readiness and directing them to the right learning pathway. You'll generally get better results analyzing patterns across related skills that reflect a user's overall proficiency in a topic, rather than assigning based on a single answer.
What Step 4 Automation Supports
| Logic type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| ANY | Triggers if any rating meets your threshold. | If ANY rating ≤ 2, assign a refresher assessment. |
| AVERAGE | Triggers based on the average across the audit. | If the average ≤ 3, assign an intermediate-level assessment. |
| Operators | Define thresholds with ≥, ≤, or =. | ≤ 2 for a foundational tier, = 3 to reinforce, ≥ 4 for a stretch goal. |
The specific assignment names in these examples (such as "refresher assessment") are illustrative, not the names of real library content - substitute your own.
Use ANY for broader audits, or design smaller, topic-specific audits so the overall result stays targeted and meaningful.
Choosing Between User, Manager, or Combined Ratings
Step 4 can evaluate results based on User Rating, Manager Rating, or Either/Or (combined logic). Use these to align automation with your review structure and learning culture.
| Rating source | When to use |
|---|---|
| User Rating | Captures self-perception and confidence - for example, triggering refreshers for users who rate themselves ≤ 2. |
| Manager Rating | Reflects observed competence - for example, assigning reinforcement training based on verified skill gaps. |
| Either/Or (Combined) | Triggers if either rating meets the threshold - for example, blending self-insight and manager feedback to highlight users ready for development. |
Why Not Assign Based on Individual Skills?
- Single-skill data is narrow - one low rating can misrepresent overall ability.
- Context matters - patterns across related skills show a more genuine picture of need.
- Avoids dozens of small, confusing micro-assignments for the same user.
- Grouping skills into clusters keeps follow-up learning focused and meaningful.
Designing Micro Skill Audits for Better Routing
To make automation meaningful, consider building small, topic-specific Skills audits - typically 5–8 questions - so a follow-up assignment already matches a defined competency area. For example, an audit on modeling basics could route into a modeling fundamentals assessment, while one on drawing production could route into a documentation and detailing learning path. (These are illustrative pairings, not names of existing library content.)
A consistent naming convention - such as Discipline - Topic - Level, for example "Inventor - Assemblies - L2" - can make rule mapping and reporting easier to manage as the number of audits grows.
Example Rule Patterns
These are illustrative starting points, not fixed recommendations - adapt the thresholds and tiers to your own content and goals.
| Goal | Example rule |
|---|---|
| Tiering by level | Average ≥ 4 → Advanced; = 3 → Intermediate; ≤ 2 → Fundamentals. |
| Safety net | ANY ≤ 2 → a targeted support audit. |
| Team-specific tracks | Run separate micro audits per team (for example, fabrication vs. design) with distinct follow-ups. |
Getting Started
- Review your existing Skills audit structure.
- Identify 2–3 logical clusters that align to real skill areas.
- Apply Step 4 automation using ANY or AVERAGE rules.
- Test results with a pilot group before scaling to all users.
Helpful Tips
- If you'd like support optimizing your Skills audits or Step 4 logic, contact the Support team for a review session.
Common Questions
Should I set rules on individual skills or on clusters of related skills?
Clusters, generally. A single low rating can misrepresent overall ability, and routing on individual skills tends to produce many small, confusing assignments rather than one meaningful one.
What's the difference between ANY and AVERAGE logic?
ANY triggers if a single rating in the audit meets your threshold, which suits broader audits. AVERAGE triggers based on the audit's overall average, which suits smaller, topic-specific audits where you want the overall result to be the signal.