Completes bounded work with clear goals and guidance, understands the user and intended outcome, verifies the output, and communicates promptly.
Clarifies the user, goal, and acceptance conditions before starting a task.Evidence to inspect: Can restate the user, intended change, and completion conditions.
Completes agreed work and promptly surfaces deviations that could affect the result.Evidence to inspect: Deliverable meets the agreement; risks or delays are raised early.
Uses AI only when permitted and suitable for the task; checks facts, code, and references in proportion to risk before submitting.Applies when: Assess only when policy permits and the task is suitable for AI assistance; choosing not to use AI is not by itself negative evidence.Evidence to inspect: Can explain the change and show execution or manual review evidence.
Checks acceptance and user feedback after delivery and follows up on unresolved issues.Evidence to inspect: Acceptance records connect feedback to follow-up changes.
Owns a feature or component end to end, delivers reliably, follows operational feedback, and supports peers when relevant to the role.
Owns delivery of a feature and tracks whether it solves the intended user problem.Evidence to inspect: Reviews adoption, completion, or user feedback after release and adjusts.
Makes evidence-based trade-offs among cost, quality, and speed within agreed goals.Evidence to inspect: Explains the choice, alternatives, and conditions that could change the result.
Where role policy permits and risk is controlled, compares AI with alternatives on total cost, quality, and risk while owning the user outcome.Applies when: Do not assess by AI usage frequency or speed; consider task suitability and available validation.Evidence to inspect: Compares workflow time or quality and retains human review points.
Breaks feature goals into milestones, acceptance measures, and pause conditions and updates them with feedback.Evidence to inspect: Plans include outcome hypotheses, dependencies, and changes.
Clarifies ambiguous problems, weighs cross-component options, and drives project outcomes while making authority and decision boundaries explicit when proposing plans or pivots.
Turns an ambiguous request into a verifiable user or business outcome with baselines and guardrails.Evidence to inspect: The team can explain why, how success is measured, and when to stop or adjust.
Uses user evidence, market or operational constraints to align cross-functional teams on high-value work.Evidence to inspect: Priorities reflect opportunity cost and are revisited against outcomes.
Assesses contribution to outcomes and distinguishes causal evidence from correlation.Evidence to inspect: Explains metric definitions, observation window, guardrails, and attribution limits.
Proposes phased plans within the owned project or domain, connecting opportunities, outcome measures, investment, and work declined; quarterly is one possible review cadence.Evidence to inspect: The plan states outcome hypotheses, capacity constraints, and reprioritization triggers.
When results contradict the premise, reduces, stops, or redirects work within authority; beyond that authority, presents evidence and a recommendation to the decision owner.Evidence to inspect: Records include pre-set conditions, evidence, and where released resources went.
Creates sustained professional value in a critical domain or across teams, scaling impact through reusable practices and collaboration without assuming company-wide governance or formal succession duties.
Translates domain-level business goals into sustainable product, technical, and operational outcomes.Evidence to inspect: Roadmap connects business measures, capability investment, and long-term cost.
When carrying relevant domain responsibility, contributes market, business-model, and long-term investment judgment across opportunities; company-wide portfolio authority is not assumed.Evidence to inspect: Decision states opportunity cost, downside scenarios, and evidence thresholds for further investment.
Establishes cross-team outcome reviews that shape priorities and subsequent investment.Evidence to inspect: Review shares definitions and attribution limits, assigns actions, and changes resource choices.
Translates annual direction into domain plans and quarterly checkpoints with dependencies and stop conditions.Evidence to inspect: Long-term goals connect to near-term investment through an adjustable plan.
Evaluates total cost and actual adoption for platform, reuse, or relevant AI investments, testing long-term value assumptions without treating adoption itself as success.Applies when: Assess the AI portion only when the investment includes AI or AI is an alternative.Evidence to inspect: Compares maintenance, migration, adoption, and alternatives.
Owns first-line management responsibilities for team outcomes, people development, collaboration, and operating mechanisms; understands the business and domain boundaries and uses professional judgment to review and delegate.
Defines team goals, outcome measures, and quality guardrails with partners and recalibrates priorities.Evidence to inspect: The team explains outcomes and trade-offs and adjusts based on evidence.
Allocates capacity across delivery, reliability, talent growth, and technical investment.Evidence to inspect: Allocation reflects business risk and outcomes, with trade-offs recorded.
Owns team outcomes and explains how management decisions contributed and where attribution is limited.Evidence to inspect: Distinguishes team delivery, external conditions, and personal contribution without appropriating credit.
Plans and reviews with business partners at the cadence the decisions require, linking user opportunities, team investment, and outcome validation; the cadence can change with context.Evidence to inspect: Plans trace to opportunity evidence, outcome measures, and resource allocation.
Renegotiates commitments when goals, capacity, or external conditions change, with clear accountability for scope cuts, deferral, or stopping.Evidence to inspect: Business partners acknowledge revised commitments and track their consequences.
Within actual authority, leads managers to deliver across teams and is accountable for resource direction and organizational capability; strategy, budget, and reorganization authority depend on the role mandate.
Within organizational mandate, translates business direction into multi-team outcomes, portfolio priorities, and adjustable investment plans; executive strategy or budget authority is not assumed.Evidence to inspect: Team goals form a coherent portfolio and outcomes/resources are revisited regularly.
Makes organization-level trade-offs across growth, efficiency, reliability, safety, and long-term capability.Evidence to inspect: Names downside scenarios, risk owners, and conditions for changing course.
Establishes consistent outcome measurement and review so leaders adjust direction using evidence.Evidence to inspect: Cross-team measures are interpretable; attribution limits and misses are transparent.
Within actual authority, connects annual direction, phased portfolios, and recurring reviews while making assumptions, resource limits, and exit conditions explicit; cadence follows the decision cycle.Evidence to inspect: Planning horizons are traceable, and cross-team conflicts can trigger portfolio changes.
Stops ineffective investments when business direction or portfolio assumptions fail and manages resource shifts and team transitions.Evidence to inspect: Stopping and redirection include prior evidence, transition cost, and subsequent results.
