HR & performance glossary
What is an individual development plan?
Individual development plan (IDP): A plan agreed between an employee and their manager setting out which capabilities to develop, the actions that will build them and how progress will be judged.
Definition
An individual development plan, or IDP, is a written plan agreed between an employee and their manager that sets out which capabilities the employee will develop, why they matter, the actions that will build them and how progress will be judged. It can serve the current role, a role the employee is aiming for, or both.
An IDP is not the same as a performance improvement plan. An IDP is forward-looking and usually driven by the employee’s growth and aspirations; a PIP is a formal response to performance that is falling short. Most employees benefit from an IDP, while only a few ever need a PIP.
Some organisations call it a personal development plan. The name matters less than the substance: a short, agreed plan tied to evidence about where someone is now and where they want to be.
How it works in practice
The best IDPs are short and specific. Each objective is tied to a named skill or competency with a current and target level, each action has an owner and a date, and the plan mixes formal learning with on-the-job experience such as stretch assignments, projects and coaching. A plan with a dozen vague aims usually delivers none of them.
An IDP is usually drafted after a performance review or 360, when the evidence about strengths and gaps is freshest. The employee proposes objectives, the manager adds the organisation’s view of what the role or the next role needs, and the two agree a plan they both believe is achievable. Experience on the job and learning from colleagues usually carry more of the plan than courses.
The plan is then reviewed at regular 1-on-1s rather than only at year end, so actions can be adjusted when priorities change.
A worked example
An illustrative example: the team described is hypothetical, not a customer.
Consider a hypothetical project coordinator who wants to move into a project manager role within two years. Their assessment against the framework shows they meet the target level for planning and communication, but are one level below target on stakeholder management and two levels below on budget control for the project manager role.
Their IDP holds two objectives. For budget control: shadow a project manager through a quarterly budget review, then own the budget on a small internal project, with a finance colleague as a point of contact. For stakeholder management: lead the fortnightly client update on their current project and ask the client lead for feedback afterwards. One short course on project finance supports the first objective, and nothing on the plan is vague enough to be ticked off without being done.
When the next assessment shows budget control has moved up a level, that objective is updated with the next step rather than the plan being started again from scratch.
Common mistakes
Too many objectives. Effort spread across a long list rarely changes anything; two or three well-chosen objectives are enough for most people at any one time.
Only listing courses. Training is useful, but most capability is built by doing the work with support, and a plan that is entirely a list of courses rarely changes how someone works.
Writing it once and filing it. Plans stall when they live in a document nobody opens between reviews.
Disconnecting it from evidence. An IDP should start from assessed gaps against the current or target role, not from a generic list of skills everyone should have.
Making it the manager’s plan. If the employee has not shaped the objectives, they are unlikely to own them. The manager’s role is to make sure the plan is realistic and to create the opportunities it relies on.
How CLEAR Talent supports it
Employee development software keeps the plan beside the evidence that created it. In CLEAR Talent, an assessment against the competency framework drafts an IDP from the competencies that matter most for the role, ranked by the size of the gap; a 360° review suggests a plan from its lowest-scoring, highest-importance competencies; and where someone has named the role they want next, the gap is calculated against that role. Progress is then re-tested in the next competency assessment.