Skills Progression Map¶

How capability develops across the course: five levels, from recognising the vocabulary to running a project end to end. Use it to see where you are, what comes next, and — most usefully — to work out what to revise.

At a glance

Levels: 5, plus the capstone as the integration test
Each level is gated by a "can do" checklist and an artefact
How to use it: find the highest level you can honestly complete, then study the one above it

The capability ladder¶

flowchart TD
    accTitle: Five capability levels and the capstone
    accDescr {
    Level 1 Foundation, which speaks the vocabulary, leads to Level 2 Planner, which can plan a
    bounded project, then Level 3 Adaptive planner, which can choose and justify an approach, Level
    4 Controller, which can run and control a live project, and Level 5 Professional practitioner,
    which can operate beyond the team. The Capstone Integrator level demonstrates all five on one
    project.
    }
    L1["Level 1 · Foundation<br/>Speaks the vocabulary"] --> L2
    L2["Level 2 · Planner<br/>Can plan a bounded project"] --> L3
    L3["Level 3 · Adaptive planner<br/>Can choose and justify an approach"] --> L4
    L4["Level 4 · Controller<br/>Can run and control a live project"] --> L5
    L5["Level 5 · Professional practitioner<br/>Can operate beyond the team"] --> C
    C["Capstone · Integrator<br/>Demonstrates all five on one project"]

Each level builds on the one below. Levels are not merely more topics — they are different kinds of capability: knowing, planning, choosing, controlling, and finally operating in a professional context.

Level 1 — Foundation¶

Speaks the vocabulary and can tell what kind of work is in front of them.


Modules	01–02
Sessions	S1–S6

Can do:

Define a project, and distinguish it from operations, a programme, and a portfolio.
Explain three ways a software project differs from projects in other disciplines.
Compare predictive, iterative, incremental, and adaptive life cycles.
Identify stakeholders and analyse their influence and interest.
Describe the governance path that authorises and changes a project.
Write a business case and a project charter from a one-paragraph idea.

Evidence: a project charter and a stakeholder register.

Self-check: Foundations quiz, plus the Lab 01 rubric.

Level 2 — Planner¶

Can take a bounded scope and turn it into a consistent plan.


Modules	03, 05, 06, 07
Sessions	S7, S11–S16

Can do:

Explain how scope, schedule, cost, and quality constrain one another, and show it on one page.
Elicit and write verifiable requirements, separating functional from non-functional.
Decompose scope into a work breakdown structure without gaps or overlap.
Build a network diagram, identify the critical path, and calculate float.
Produce a Gantt-style schedule and justify or reject compression.
Estimate effort and cost with two independent techniques, and express the result as a range.
Build a budget with an explicit contingency reserve.

Evidence: a scope baseline, a WBS, a schedule with a critical path, and a cost estimate with a stated uncertainty range.

Self-check: the mid-course checkpoint self-audit — every artefact must agree with the one before it.

Level 3 — Adaptive planner¶

Can choose a delivery approach and justify it, rather than defaulting to one.


Modules	04
Sessions	S8–S10

Can do:

State the agile values and principles and what each implies for how a team works.
Describe the Scrum roles, events, and artefacts and how they reinforce one another.
Apply Kanban — visualised work, explicit policies, and work-in-progress limits — to a flow of work.
Argue for either predictive or adaptive delivery on a specific project, using evidence.
Name three common misapplications of agile and predict their consequences.

Evidence: a product backlog, an iteration plan, and a short written justification of your chosen approach.

Self-check: compare your iteration plan with the predictive plan you built at Level 2 and explain each difference.

Level 4 — Controller¶

Can run a project that is already moving, and say honestly how it is going.


Modules	08–11
Sessions	S18–S24

Can do:

Identify risks systematically and maintain a risk register with owners, triggers, and responses — including at least one opportunity.
Write quality criteria and design a proportionate review-and-test strategy.
Explain verification versus validation, and place each in a delivery process.
Construct a RACI matrix and a communications plan.
Select metrics that inform decisions, and explain how each could be gamed.
Interpret variance and produce an honest status report.
Run a change request through a defined approval path instead of absorbing the change.

Evidence: a risk register, a quality strategy, a RACI and communications plan, a status report with variance analysis, and a completed change request.

Self-check: take your own status report and try to disprove it. If you cannot, it is either accurate or insufficiently specific.

Level 5 — Professional practitioner¶

Can operate beyond your own team and beyond delivery day.


Modules	12
Sessions	S25–S29

Can do:

Describe the procurement cycle, select a contract shape for a piece of work, and name the risks the contract does not remove.
Produce the documentation a project needs and explain what a handover pack must contain.
Design a coordination approach for a distributed team and identify its additional costs.
Analyse an ethical dilemma and justify a course of action that you would defend publicly.
Run a project closure and capture lessons learned that a colleague could act on.
Explain how programme and portfolio governance can redirect an individual project, and why that is not a failure of project management.

Evidence: a closure pack (documentation, lessons learned, post-implementation review) and a short ethical case analysis.

Self-check: explain to someone outside the course why closing a project properly matters. If the answer is "paperwork", go back to Module 12.

Capstone — Integrator¶

Demonstrates Levels 1–5 on one real project, not in isolation.


Modules	13
Sessions	S30–S32 (with milestones from S6 onward)

Can do:

Assemble one internally consistent project record, from charter to post-implementation review.
Control the project against an agreed baseline and report variance honestly.
Show that your artefacts agree with one another — the charter's scope matches the WBS, the risks in the register appear in the reports, the retrospective cites real evidence.
Explain every significant decision you made, and what you would do differently.

Evidence: the capstone artefact set. Rubric planned — see Module 13 — Capstone Project.

Self-check: the "could a stranger act on this?" test from How to Self-Assess, applied to every artefact.

Cross-cutting skills¶

Some skills are not tied to one level. They develop continuously and are assessed inside the labs.

Skill	First appears	Grows through	Evidence
Writing for a decision-maker	Level 1 (charter)	Every lab	Documents another person can act on
Reasoning under uncertainty	Level 2 (estimates)	Risk, control	Ranges, reserves, risk responses
Honest reporting	Level 4 (status reports)	Facility, closure	Bad news disclosed early
Analytical judgement	Level 1 (case studies)	Every module	Case-study answers
Explaining a trade-off	Level 2 (constraints)	Advanced practice	Written justifications

Level → module → session summary¶

Level	Modules	Sessions	Artefact produced	Checked by
1 Foundation	01–02	S1–S6	Charter, stakeholder register	Foundations quiz, Lab 01 rubric
2 Planner	03, 05, 06, 07	S7, S11–S16	Scope baseline, WBS, schedule, estimate	Mid-course checkpoint audit
3 Adaptive planner	04	S8–S10	Backlog, iteration plan, approach justification	Comparison with the predictive plan
4 Controller	08–11	S18–S24	Risk register, quality plan, RACI, status report, change request	Module quizzes, status-report check
5 Professional practitioner	12	S25–S29	Closure pack, ethical analysis	Retrospective guidance
Integrator	13	S30–S32	One coherent project record	Capstone rubric

How to use this map¶

To progress: do not move to the next level until you can honestly tick every "can do" statement at the current one. The checklist is a gate, not a suggestion — later levels assume earlier capability.

To revise: work backwards. Find the highest level where you can tick everything, and study the level above it. This is far more efficient than re-reading the whole course.

To self-assess a lab: pick the level the lab belongs to and read its "can do" list. If you cannot tick an item, the lab is not finished, however polished the document looks.

What this map is not

These levels describe the course's outcomes. They are not a professional certification, and completing the course does not make anyone a senior project manager. Experience, judgement under pressure, and accountability for real consequences are earned on real projects, not in a course. What the course can do is give you the vocabulary, the techniques, and the habits of mind to learn from that experience faster.

Related pages: Learning Path · Curriculum Roadmap · Self-Assessment