For consultants assessing how work runs today
Gap Analysis Template and Worked Example
Show how far today is from the target and what to fix first: a gap analysis table with evidence, a scoring guide and a worked example.
Step by step
How to do a gap analysis in five steps
A gap analysis compares how a process, team or capability works today with where it needs to be, then turns each difference into an action with an owner. NIST's Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 sets out the same method: a gap analysis of the differences between current and target profiles4, then "a prioritized action plan" to address them. These five steps apply it to any process.
| Step | What to do | Common mistake |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Scope it and agree on the target | Name the process, where it starts and ends, and what is out of scope. A SIPOC diagram maps it on one page. Then get the target from the sponsor in writing, with a measure and a date. | Assessing first and agreeing on the target later, so every difference looks like a gap. |
| 2. Gather the evidence | Use at least two kinds of evidence for every area, and two sources for any gap you will score 4 or 5. The worked example rests on seven interviews, six months of data, 12 documents and one observed close. | Writing up one person's account of the work as fact. |
| 3. Write the current state | One fact per line, with a number where you have one and its source in brackets: "41 of 118 reconciliations reviewed by day 5 (tracker, June)." Group the lines into 5 to 12 areas that don't overlap and together cover the scope, as the MECE principle asks. | An opinion with no source, such as "reconciliations are slow." |
| 4. Name and score each gap | Say what is missing compared with the target, not how to fix it. Score its size and its impact from 1 to 5, then multiply them for a priority. If the cause is unclear, run a root cause analysis before you choose an action. | Writing a fix as the gap: "buy reconciliation software" is an action. |
| 5. Assign actions and re-measure | Give each gap one first action, one named owner and a date. Act on High gaps within 30 days and plan Medium ones within 90. Re-measure on a set date and update the table. | Forty findings with no owners and no date to check progress. |
NIST's framework adds that an organization "can repeat these steps as often as needed." A gap analysis is a snapshot, so run it again when the target or the work changes.
How it works
How do you assess the current state?
Build the current state from four kinds of evidence: interviews, data, documents and observation. Start with the people who do the work, not just their managers, and ask about the last real example: "Walk me through last month's close, day by day." Jakob Nielsen, writing for the Nielsen Norman Group, warns that people asked how they usually do a task often describe an idealized workflow1. The shortcuts and workarounds they leave out are where gaps tend to hide.
Pull three to six months of each measure, so one bad month doesn't set the story, and note how each figure is defined. Read the written procedures against what people tell you: a mismatch is often the gap itself. Then watch the work once, noting where people wait, re-key data or chase approvals, and asking why. The Lean Enterprise Institute calls this a gemba walk, a management practice for grasping the current situation through direct observation and inquiry before taking action2.
Tag each note with the area it belongs to, then count how many people raised each point. Nielsen Norman Group's guide to thematic analysis says a theme emerges when related findings appear multiple times across participants or data sources3. When sources disagree, record both and ask why: data usually beats memory, but a figure can be defined in a way that hides the problem. If you have transcripts, interview synthesis finds the themes and counts them for you.
How it works
From your notes to a gap analysis
Download it or open it in River
Download both Word documents free, or click Edit with AI to open them in River. Paste your notes above first if you have them.
River drafts a first pass
If you pasted notes, River fills the table, summary and next steps from them alone, marks scores as proposed and puts anything missing in brackets.
Check the evidence
Confirm each current-state line against an interview, a figure or a document, and agree on the scores with the client.
Close the open questions
Ask River for an interview guide or an email of your questions to the sponsor, then share the analysis once the scores are settled.
| Area | Current state (evidence) | Gap | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reconciliations | 41 of 118 reviewed by day 5 (tracker) | 77 reviews land after day 5 | High · 4 × 5 = 20 |
| Intercompany | $310,000 unmatched on day 3 (IC report) | No cut-off and no shared report | High · 4 × 4 = 16 |
| Close ownership | 6 of 23 tasks have no owner (calendar) | Progress chased by email | High · 4 × 4 = 16 |
| Reporting pack | Built by hand from 4 exports (observed) | 1.5 days of manual work | Medium · 4 × 3 = 12 |
| Journal approval | Stricter than policy FIN-07 (journal log) | Approvals queue on days 3 and 4 | Low · 2 × 3 = 6 |
Invented example: a 9-day close against a 5-day target.
What you'll get
Current state with its evidence, the gap, priority and owner, plus an example
- A gap table with evidence, impact, priority, action and owner
- A 1 to 5 scoring guide for gap size and impact
- A worked month-end close example, and a first pass if you paste notes
Before and after
Your notes in. A first gap analysis out.
Close takes 9 working days, CFO wants 5 by year end. Recs are in spreadsheets, maybe a third reviewed by day 5. Intercompany agreed by email, still open on day 3. Only Dana can do fixed assets. Tom (controller) says day 2 is spent finding out who's doing what.
Target: month-end close in 5 working days by year end. Area: Account reconciliations. Current state: Reconciliations are kept in spreadsheets, and about a third are reviewed by day 5 (your notes). Gap: About two thirds of reviews land after day 5. Size 4 (proposed). Impact: 5 (proposed). Priority: High (20, proposed). Owner: [owner]. Area: Skills and cover. Current state: Only Dana can do fixed assets (your notes). Gap: No second person can cover. Size 3 (proposed). To confirm with the client: How many balance sheet accounts are reconciled each month?
Every line points back to your notes. Scores stay marked proposed, and owners and dates you didn't give stay in brackets.
What lands in your doc
What's inside the gap analysis template
- Gap Analysis Template
A header naming the sponsor, scope and evidence base, then the summary, target, next steps and questions to confirm. - The gap analysis table
Area, current state with its evidence, target state, gap size, impact, priority, action and owner, one row per area. - A 1 to 5 scoring guide
Gap size and impact defined in plain words, multiplied into High, Medium or Low, with what happens next. - How to gather the current state
Interviews, data, documents and observation: what to ask for, and what to do when sources disagree. - Six rules and a send checklist
Rules such as target first and one owner per action, plus eight checks to run before you send. - Gap Analysis Example
An invented finance team's month-end close: seven areas scored and actioned, with notes on why each part works.
Questions consultants ask
Common questions
What is a gap analysis?
A gap analysis sets the current state of a process, team or business against a target state and describes the difference, area by area. Each gap then gets a size, an impact, a priority, an action and an owner. Consultants run one before a change program or a system selection, or when a team keeps missing a target.
What should a gap analysis report include?
A gap analysis report has six parts: a summary the sponsor can read alone, the target and its measures, the gap table, scoring scales, next steps and open questions. Write the summary last, using only numbers from the table. Aim for 5 to 12 areas in the table: enough to cover the scope, few enough to hold in mind.
What's the difference between current state and future state?
The current state is how the work runs today, shown with evidence. The future state, or target state, is where it needs to be by a date, set or approved by the client. In NIST's Cybersecurity Framework, too, a target profile holds the desired outcomes an organization has selected and prioritized4. The gap is the difference, described before anyone proposes a fix.
How do you prioritize gaps?
Score each gap from 1 to 5 for size and for impact on the target, using the definitions in the template, then multiply them. A score of 15 to 25 is High, 8 to 12 is Medium, and 1 to 6 is Low. Agree on the scores with the client before you share them, because impact depends on what the client values.
How is a gap analysis different from a SWOT analysis?
A gap analysis measures one process or capability against a set target. A SWOT takes a wider view of a business: internal strengths and weaknesses, and external opportunities and threats. Run the SWOT first when you don't yet know where to look. River's SWOT analysis generator builds one from client files, with a source under every point.
Is this gap analysis template free?
Yes. Download the template and the worked example as two Word documents, with no signup. Edit with AI opens both in a free River workspace, where River can draft a first pass from notes you paste. Paid plans add more AI use and access to the most advanced models.
What does Edit with AI do?
It opens the template and the worked example in a free River workspace. If you pasted notes on how the work runs today, River drafts a first pass from those notes alone. Each current-state line points back to them, scores are marked proposed, and missing facts become questions for the client. Without notes, River can fill it in with you.
Your next step