1334 questions
Could not save this preference. Your choice applies only to this page.
Stage profile · Individual contributor
Clarifies ambiguous problems, weighs cross-component options, and drives project outcomes while making authority and decision boundaries explicit when proposing plans or pivots.
Read these as observable expectations across repeated work, not as a checklist for a single project. First distinguish whether the role expects the work, whether the person had a chance to demonstrate it, and whether the evidence supports the claim. Lack of opportunity or evidence is not itself a negative judgment. AI use is judged by verified outcomes, sound boundaries, and the quality of decisions; choosing not to use AI can be sound.
These lenses and the A–H capability map answer different questions. One experience may provide evidence across lenses, but do not count the same result multiple times.
Understand the people served and intended outcomes, make evidence-based trade-offs, and verify contribution. For platform, infrastructure, reliability, and safety work, cost, efficiency, risk reduction, and internal-user outcomes count; direct revenue ownership is not universal.
Apply relevant knowledge to diagnose, design, implement or review, validate quality, and make evolution decisions. The professional leaves required depend on the role.
Help others work effectively through communication, coordination, review, shared methods, coaching, or organizational mechanisms. IC influence is not measured by direct reports; managers also own formal people responsibilities.
Observe questioning, reasoning, learning transfer, judgment updates, relationship handling, and recovery in work. This is not a fixed personality or potential verdict; do not infer it from extroversion, fluent speech, or willingness to overwork.
Use this structure to understand a real example. Strong judgment can appear in a failed project; a successful result alone does not prove personal causation.
The labels beside capability references describe that capability’s role in this standard; they do not make the whole standard optional. Any role or scenario condition is stated separately.
Evidence to inspect: The team can explain why, how success is measured, and when to stop or adjust.
Evidence to inspect: Priorities reflect opportunity cost and are revisited against outcomes.
Evidence to inspect: Explains metric definitions, observation window, guardrails, and attribution limits.
Evidence to inspect: The plan states outcome hypotheses, capacity constraints, and reprioritization triggers.
Evidence to inspect: Records include pre-set conditions, evidence, and where released resources went.
Evidence to inspect: Proposal covers boundaries, trade-offs, migration/rollback, and failure paths.
Evidence to inspect: Research, prototypes, experiments, or data narrow or invalidate an approach.
Applies when: The AI portion applies only when the solution or its risks involve AI; assess ordinary quality and security against the actual work.
Evidence to inspect: Shows evaluation cases, monitoring/escalation conditions, privacy/access controls, or human handoff.
Applies when: AI investment applies only when the domain has a relevant opportunity or risk; a decision not to adopt based on value, total cost, and risk is valid.
Evidence to inspect: The roadmap includes dependencies, cost, risk, checkpoints, and exit options.
Evidence to inspect: Data meaning and migration correctness remain traceable after business-rule changes.
Evidence to inspect: Produces an accepted plan, commitments, and escalation path.
Evidence to inspect: Rework, incidents, or duplicated implementations decline, not just documentation volume.
Evidence to inspect: Others deliver independently and reliance on personal rescue declines.
Evidence to inspect: Capability gaps connect to work risks, closing actions, and review periods.
Evidence to inspect: Decision includes explicit assumptions and signals for reconsideration.
Evidence to inspect: Disagreements are discussable and commitments executable without avoiding hard issues.
Evidence to inspect: A later project uses the changed mechanism and can explain its effect.
Evidence to inspect: Explains which question ruled out which hypothesis and how the decision changed.
Evidence to inspect: Early risk reporting, scope changes, and recovery outcomes are traceable.
