Development and Validation of a Global Competency Framework for Preparing New Graduates for Early Career Professional Roles

Objectives: The current objectives include the development of a global competency model applicable across a wide range of jobs, industries, and geographies for university graduates entering the workplace. Method: The competency model was developed utilizing a global panel of subject matter experts and a validation survey of over 25,000 students, faculty, staff, and employers across more than 30 countries. Results: The results showed substantial consistency for the importance and criticality ratings of the competencies, with Achieving Objectives, Analyzing and Solving Problems, Adapting to Change, Communicating Orally, Learning and Self-Development, Making Decisions, Planning and Organizing, and Working Well with Others as the highest-rated competencies across regions, roles, and industries. Conclusions: The most important competencies for students entering the workforce were consistent across different jobs, different industries, and different countries. The diversity and varied experience levels of the sample provide greater generalizability than most competency modeling projects that are often idiosyncratic to specific roles, industries, subjects, or levels. Implication for Theory and/or Practice: University faculty and staff can use the results of the validation study to develop curricula and programs that will be better able to foster important competencies to ensure that their students are better prepared to enter the workplace. Although some organizations emphasize leadership as important for all professional employees, Managing the Work of Others, Leading Others, and Influencing Others were consistently rated lower in importance by employers across all roles and regions and may not be appropriate as the primary focus of skill development for new graduates.


Introduction
Academic programs have received a rapidly increasing call to incorporate skills that have been referred to as soft skills and, most recently, 21st-century skills. Merisotis and Hauser (2020) noted that significant changes to higher education as a result of COVID-19 provide an opportunity to refocus the way we think about the goals of higher education: "While we're spending billions to save higher education, college and university leaders should focus on engaging today's students. They will have to focus more clearly on building people's skills for work and civic life [italics by the current authors], including coming up with better approaches for them to demonstrate what they know and can do" (p. 1). This is not only a United States phenomenon. Mobility across borders requires that students be prepared for jobs in the global market, and competency mapping is becoming increasingly popular with employers when seeking candidates (Bhagra & Sharma, 2018). In an examination of employer expectations, Karzunina et al. (2018) found that, for all but one of the 15 employability skills identified, employers reported a distinct difference between the importance of the skill and new hire preparation in that skill and that this difference was noted generally across regions and countries.
Many universities are finding ways to incorporate essential employability skills into their curriculum (Schaffhauser, 2020), particularly as competency-based programs are becoming more popular. Integration is not necessarily straightforward, as there needs to be clear identification of which skills are important, the specific competencies required, and the integration into curricular development efforts and effective assessment (Care et al., 2018). In addition, agencies are emerging, among them the Quality Assurance Commons (https://theqacommons.org/), that certify programs which adequately prepare students for the workplace. The messages from higher education and the workplace are clear: We need to do a better job of preparing graduates for a dynamic workplace.
Our goal was to develop a comprehensive, global competency-model framework for a large network of international institutions of higher education grounded in the current needs of global employers. The model needed to be relevant across cultural contexts, disciplines, and languages. Such a competency framework would allow each of the institutions to incorporate specific competencies into the curriculum and then to assess and improve the work readiness of its students before they graduate and enter the professional workforce. Additionally, results of assessment data based on the framework could be used to modify the curriculum to ensure that student learning outcomes match the needs of employers.

Literature Review of Competency Modeling
Competency modeling has been most clearly defined by Campion et al. (2011) as "collections of knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) that are needed for effective performance in the jobs in question" (p. 226). The purpose of competency models can be wide ranging, but most organizations use them to serve as the foundation for talent management activities that can impact all levels of an organization (Sanchez & Levine, 2009). An estimated 70% to 80% of Fortune 500 companies use some type of competency model (Stone et al., 2013). Competency models can help inform a wide variety of organizational practices and initiatives, such as employee selection, career development, leadership development, and organizational change (Stevens, 2012).
Although competency modeling is commonly used in the world of work, it is also becoming more prevalent in areas outside of the traditional work environment (Stevens, 2012), such as in educational settings. For example, competency models are beginning to be used in academic training programs. Paulson (2001) argued that postsecondary institutions should be training students in the skills and abilities that enhance competencies related to liberal arts education and necessary for workplace success. Competency models have served as the foundation for competency-based education that ensures graduates have the necessary knowledge and skills to practice in their professions in many disciplines, including the health sciences (Mirzazadeh et al., 2013) and STEM fields (Jang, 2016). Given the growing emphasis on preparing college graduates for the professional workforce, it is critical to understand the competencies that employers seek in new graduates so they can be embedded into academic curricula and other development programs for students. Thus, understanding the competencies deemed important and critical by global employers is crucial for developing a comprehensive academic curriculum that prepares students for the world of work.
Several researchers have attempted to develop a core set of competencies that would apply in any organization (Prahalad & Hamel, 1990;Bartram, 2005). Core competencies are designed as components of an organization's strategy as opposed to a set of individual attributes (Prahalad & Hamel, 1990). This idea was advanced by Lawler (1994), who wrote that identification of job-related knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAO) should not be driven by job analysis at a single job level, but on a set of competencies derived via an organizational analysis.

Competency Modeling Frameworks in Higher Education
By understanding the ways that employers use competency model frameworks, higher education institutions can use this information to develop frameworks that map to the curriculum and help enhance students' skill development (Lucia & Lepsinger, 1999;Schippmann et al., 2000;Zemke, 1982). Paulson (2001) wrote, "it seems obvious that educators can no longer rely on mere convening of classes and granting of diplomas as sufficient proof that their graduates meet workplace needs" (p. 42). She goes on to write, "employers increasingly view diplomas and degrees with skepticism and want different measures to use when recruiting and retraining employees. Competencies can offer a suitable alternative" (p. 42).
Higher education has shown tremendous growth in the development of competency model frameworks. These frameworks match curricular requirements to employer or discipline needs. For example, Mirzazadeh et al. (2014) used a participatory approach with faculty and students to develop a competency framework comprising eight domains of academic and practice skills required for work in the health professions (clinical skills; communication skills; patient management; health promotion and disease prevention; personal development; professionalism; medical ethics; and law) (p. 710). Other published competency models generated to assess preparation for the workplace include University of Kansas Master of Public Administration students (Getha-Taylor et al., 2013); Master's in Human Resource Development for students in Korea (Lee 2009); and New Zealand graduate business school students (Hodges & Burchell, 2003). Lunev et al. (2013) have also created a competency model to be used across a variety of disciplines; however, their work focused specifically on Russian industry.
Thus, studies demonstrate that competency model frameworks are a useful means to ensure students are prepared for the workplace. Most frameworks have been designed to apply to specific disciplinary, institutional, and programmatic contexts. However, few studies have provided examples of competency model frameworks that are developed at the outset to be global in nature, meaning that they apply across a broad cross-section of industries, cultural contexts, and languages. In a workforce that is becoming increasingly global, training students to be successful globally potentially provides them with a competitive advantage when seeking work.

Competency Model Best Practices
We followed the recommendations from a Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) taskforce, which identified several essential elements for competency model development (Campion, et al., 2011). First, the competency model was linked to cross-industry organizational goals and objectives by gathering input from over 5,000 professionals working in organizations around the world during the development and validation of the competency model; thus, the competency model is connected with the needs of employers and addresses a key focus area involving academic-employer relationships. Second, the development of the competency model framework was driven by senior management and established as a priority for Laureate Education, Inc., a global network of institutions of higher education. To ensure buy-in, we assembled a global panel of stakeholders from across the organization to act as reviewers of all work processes and outputs. Third, we conducted dozens of focus groups using job analysis techniques with employers, faculty/staff, and students from around the world that included discussions of the work performed by new graduates and the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics needed to perform the work. Fourth, each competency was developed with a clear behavioral definition as well as detailed descriptions of what performance looks like at different levels of proficiency. The result of these best practices is a library of 20 competencies that apply to a variety of degrees across fields of study and across the widest range of earlycareer professional jobs.

Purpose of the Study
The development of the competency modeling framework is part of an ambitious, multi-year project that began in 2015 to identify, define, and measure the foundational competencies and behavioral skills graduating students require to be successful in entry-level professional jobs across industries and geographic regions. Ultimately, students are assessed on their attainment of knowledge and skills-related workplace competencies prior to graduation. The framework was developed to serve as the basis for education initiatives that seek to improve program curricula and student development at institutions across the Laureate International network. The specific objectives of this project were to (1) develop a behavioral competency framework/library, involving the input of multiple stakeholders including global employers, that would serve as the basis for other competency-based education initiatives; (2) define the competencies required by graduating students to be successful in the global workplace, enhance their employability, and lead to sustained professional success; and (3) ensure applicability of the model across all campuses, geographic regions, and fields of study.

Context
This competency model was developed by Laureate Education, Inc., a global network of institutions of higher education; at the time of development, Laureate was operating in 25 countries that included over one million students worldwide. As part of their mission, Laureate's network institutions deliver professional-oriented programs across a broad range of disciplines. These disciplines encompass the health sciences; social sciences and education; engineering; business; hospitality and culinary; and art and design, among others. It also had at the time over 50,000 faculty members; many of those faculty also work in their professions and bring a unique perspective to the classroom. Given its size, breadth of programs, and institutions across the globe, Laureate Education was extremely well positioned to undertake the development of a global competency model framework based on input from employers, faculty, staff, students, and alumni that would address the needs of its global student body and the employers with whom they will work after graduation.

Procedure Review
Initial development of the framework began by reviewing existing competency models in the competency and education research literature, reviewing internal models that had been developed independently by several institutions in the Laureate network, and compiling existing competency research and data gathered by SHL, a talent management organization that helps companies attract, develop, and grow the workforce they need to succeed, over time across a variety of organizations. This initial review was conducted to understand the current state of research in competency models, their application in educational and employment settings, and to ensure buy-in from multiple internal Laureate stakeholders interested in workplace competency development. The primary focus of the review was identifying more general competencies that are relevant globally and across job roles (e.g., working with others, problem solving) rather than competencies that are more narrow or job specific (e.g., mechanical aptitude, programming capability).

Drafting the competencies and competency-related behaviors
Once the relevant competency research and data were compiled, competency information was combined into a competency crosswalk spreadsheet listing all of the competencies identified in the literature as well as a count of how many sources each competency was found in to help identify trends, overlap, and gaps in the various models. Industrial-organizational psychologist subject matter experts reviewed the document and distilled 21 initial competencies for which titles, definitions, and proficiency levels were drafted. Some of the themes that emerged from the literature review were the importance of adaptability, resilience, continuous learning, and problem solving. Some competencies were less prevalent (e.g., social responsibility, technology) in the literature review but were included in the initial model as they were apparently becoming more critical in the current work environment and likely will continue to grow in importance.
The team of I/O psychologists then drafted behaviors that exemplified each competency. For each behavior, the team drafted descriptions of the three levels of proficiency-foundational, intermediate, and advanced. Foundational was written to reflect the level generally expected of students when they are ready to enter the workforce as entry-level professionals. The initial drafts were thoroughly reviewed in an iterative process involving the I/O psychologists and the Laureate project team.

Global stakeholder focus groups
Draft competencies were reviewed, revised, and ultimately approved by a global advisory council of Laureate leaders. Following approval by the advisory council, the project team conducted 18 global focus groups (comprised of 100 people total) with employers of university graduates and academic leaders, faculty, staff, alumni, and students. The primary objective of the focus groups was to gather information from diverse stakeholders by facilitating discussions about the competencies, behaviors, and proficiency-level descriptions. Most focus groups were conducted in English, as English is the language of business for the Laureate network. However, four of the focus groups were conducted in Spanish. All Laureate network regions were well represented in the focus groups.

Focus group feedback review
Following the focus groups, we organized all feedback by type of participant, region, competency, behavior, and proficiency level. Project leaders experienced in competency model development reviewed and made decisions about how to incorporate each piece of feedback. Additional project team members were brought in to reconcile disagreement or conflicting feedback as needed. After several revisions to the competency model based on the results of the focus groups, the advisory council reconvened for further review of the model. Additionally, the model was presented to 10 regional senior academic and business leaders for final approval in a series of four steering committee meetings, one for each of the four Laureate network regions. The resulting competency model contained 20 competencies that reflect the broad capabilities and behaviors required across jobs and professions, private sector and public sector roles, large and small businesses, and a wide range of industries. Appendix A contains the competencies and associated behaviors.

Competency validation survey
The purpose of the validation survey was to collect data on perceived importance of the competencies and associated behaviors. We also wanted to ensure, as part of a Laureate network buy-in campaign, that a representative group of employers and experts across Laureate institutions, geographic regions/cultures, and fields of study evaluated the model. We included students, many of whom work part or full time, as well as alumni who are already in the workplace, to ensure that we had a student view of the framework. Surveys were translated and launched in 12 languages: Arabic, Bahasa Malaysia, Brazilian Portuguese, English, French, German, Greek, Latin American Spanish, Malaysian Simplified Chinese, Spanish, Thai, and Turkish.
Participants were asked for each competency, "how important is this competency for the successful performance of new professionals entering the workplace?" They then assigned a rating based on a 5-point scale (1 = Not At All Important; 2 = Somewhat Important; 3 = Important; 4 = Very Important; 5 = Critically Important). In addition to rating the importance of each competency, participants were asked to choose the competencies that they deemed most critical. Specifically, respondents were shown all 20 competencies and asked to select at least five and no more than 10 competencies that they believed to be the most critical for new professionals.

Sample
The sampling plan called for participation from 17,577 participants across all roles of interest, including current students, faculty, staff/administrators, alumni, and employers. A total of 30,146 individuals entered the survey, some of whom dropped out before answering any questions. The final sample in the analysis dataset included 25,202 participants, exceeding the original sampling plan by 7,625 individuals (43%). More than 5,000 professionals and employers from around the world that were not currently affiliated with the university chose to participate. The professionals and employers were solicited through the university's alumni and other professional networks. Individuals from different levels within employing organizations participated in the survey, including approximately equal percentages of respondents falling into individual contributor, first-line supervisors, mid-level managers, senior managers, and other categories. These individuals provide first-hand perspective on the capabilities expected of new professionals entering the workplace. The survey data were examined to ensure that only high-quality data were retained for analysis. Participants were excluded based on two criteria, 1) if they completed the survey in less than two and a half minutes, or 2) if they had a standard deviation of zero in all responses.

Results
Analysis of the survey data focused on: (a) evaluating the importance of each competency across geographic regions, (b) evaluating the importance of each competency by industry, and (c) evaluating the importance ratings of each competency by role (i.e., students, faculty, administrators, alumni, and employers). Given the importance of information from participants within potential employing organizations (e.g., supervisors, hiring managers, HR professionals) regarding the expectations of entry-level professionals, many of the subsequent analyses focus on this "employer" data. The results, however, are generally consistent across students, faculty/staff, administrators, and alumni roles.
Appendix A provides definitions for each of the 20 competencies validated in the study. Table 1 shows the overall M, SD, inter-rater agreement (rwg) and rank of the Importance rating for each competency across all respondents and for the Employer role. Rank is the numerical order of the importance means, with 1 = most important and 20 = least important. When two competencies had the same mean to the hundredth decimal place value (.01), the same rank was given so as not to exaggerate minor differences in means. Inter-rater agreement was calculated using the rwg statistic (Burke & Dunlap, 2002). This index varies between 0 and 1 and is used to assess agreement when multiple raters rate a single item. It compares the observed standard deviation in ratings to the expected standard deviation if the ratings were random (James et al., 1984). That is, the rwg describes the extent to which individuals agree on the rating of an item compared to the agreement that would be expected by chance. A rwg of 1 indicates perfect agreement and rwg of 0 indicates complete lack of agreement. At the overall level, the rwg ranged from .55 to .69, indicating moderate to high levels of agreement. All competencies received a mean importance rating of at least 3.0 (with the lowest rating being 3.8), indicating that they are all validated as being important for entry-level professionals.

Consistency Across Roles, Regions, and Industries
There was remarkable consistency in the importance ratings of the competencies across regions, industries, and roles. The following competencies were rated as very important (mean rating greater than 4.0) across all regions, industries, and roles: The rank ordering of competencies was very consistent across participant roles, with the highest-rated and lowest-rated competencies generally the same across groups (see Table 2). One notable exception is that faculty, staff, and administrators rated Upholding Ethical Standards and Social Responsibility in the top three competencies while students, alumni, and employers had rankings for that competency in the middle range Note. Ninety participants only completed the first 10 ratings (Students N = 60; Faculty/Staff N = 6; Administrator N = 3; Alumni N = 9; Employer N = 12); *2 student participants answered only 19 ratings. The competency rankings by industry are shown in Table 4, and they similarly display high levels of consistency. Working Well With Others rated in the top three most important competencies by six of the eight industry sectors, and Communicating Orally and Analyzing and Solving Problems were both rated in the top three most important competencies for five of the eight industry sectors. As it was by region, Managing the Work of Others was consistently ranked as one of the least important competencies across industries. Applying a Global Mindset was also ranked among the least important competencies. Some notable differences across industries were that Generating Ideas and Innovating was ranked most highly by respondents from the creative industries, and Upholding Ethical Standards was particularly highly ranked in the healthcare and government industries.

Identification of the Most Critical Competencies
For the identification of the most critical competencies, Table 5 shows the number of competencies chosen by participants, with over 40% of participants choosing 10 competencies as critical. Table 6 shows the percentage of individuals who identified each competency as critical, as well as the rankings by role. Rank is the numerical order of the percentages, with 1 indicating that the competency was identified as critical by the highest percentage of individuals and 20 indicating that it was identified as critical by the lowest percentage of individuals. When the same percentage of individuals chose two competencies, the same rank was given so as not to exaggerate minor differences. As was found with the importance ratings, there is considerable consistency in the criticality rankings across roles.
Significant overlap exists between the top 10 competencies identified by importance and the top 10 identified by criticality. One competency, Generating Ideas & Innovating, was included in the 10 most important competencies but not the 10 competencies most frequently identified as critical. Another competency, Upholding Ethical Standards & Demonstrating Social Responsibility, was one of the top 10 competencies in terms of criticality but not importance. Otherwise all of the competencies were the same in both ranking lists, demonstrating a great deal of consistency in the rating tasks. Given the similarity in the results across role groups and the focus on data from employers, Figure 1 provides a visual representation of the importance and criticality of the competencies for the employer data. Overall 24756 Note. 446 participants had full or partial competency rating data but no criticality ratings

Discussion
The purpose of the present field study was to determine which competencies were most salient for graduating college students entering the global professional workforce. Data were collected from a large global sample of students, alumni, faculty, staff, and employers. Our study is unique in its goal of establishing competencies relevant for global, rather than national, employability. The validated competencies are consistent with, but expand beyond, those used by others, such as the VALUE rubrics developed by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (Rhodes, 2010), the University of Kent Employability Skills (https://www.kent.ac.uk/ces/student/skills.html), among others. The results show that the most important competencies for new graduates entering the workforce are generally common across geographic regions and industries, with Communicating Orally, Working Well with Others, and Analyzing and Solving Problems as the core set of very important competencies. This finding is consistent with that of Rios et al. (2020), who found in a content analysis of job advertisements that oral and written communication, collaboration, and problem-solving skills were most important for employers. This finding may also be relatively stable; Robles (2012) found that among the most important soft skills at that time were teamwork and communication. One finding that was surprising was how consistently employers, students, and faculty were in ranking the importance of competencies; for example, this consistency was not found in other studies. For example, Karzunina et al. (2018) found that students tended not to understand how employers value various workplace skills. More recently, Succi and Canovi (2020) found that employers continue to rate soft skills as more important than students and graduates do and that the ranking of importance also differs.
Despite the conventional wisdom by some organizations that leadership is a highly important characteristic for all professional employees, competencies such as Managing the Work of Others, Leading Others, and Influencing Others were consistently rated lower in importance by employers across all roles and regions and may not be appropriate as the primary focus of skill development for new graduates. This finding is also consistent with Succi and Canovi (2020), who found that management skills and leadership skills are the lowest ranked by employers among a list of 20 soft skills. This may be due in part because, in most regions of the world, new graduates do not often enter the workforce in leadership roles. Also, Applying a Global Mindset was generally rated as being of low importance. Although cultural sensitivity can be important for some jobs, it may not be imperative for many entry-level professional roles. Alternatively, these leadership and global mindset competencies may be best developed on the job rather than at university or targeted to those students with an interest and an opportunity for global work assignments. Organizations hiring new graduates should consider incorporating the leadership and global mindset competencies into their training programs.

Significance
The contributions of this field study are substantial. To our knowledge, no competency modeling studies have been reported with a sample size this large and diverse and that have been validated by students, faculty, and employers. The competency survey was administered in over 30 countries in the major regions of the world. Furthermore, gaining the perspective of students, university employees, and private sector employers is rare for a competency modeling project. Additional evidence from the project shows that, for five key competencies, a cross-cultural assessment developed demonstrated measurement invariance, suggesting that assessment scores are consistent between European and Latin American contexts (Herde et al. (2019). Taken together, the diversity and varied experience levels of the sample and the statistical research of the resulting assessment demonstrate that the present competency framework provides greater generalizability than most competency modeling projects that are often idiosyncratic to specific roles, industries, subjects, or levels.
The identification of key competencies applicable across the world of work can be of significant benefit to universities and students. Many students entering university do not know specifically what career they will pursue, and individuals who begin working in one industry or role often change career paths at some point in their lives. It is extremely valuable to have a taxonomy of competencies that are broadly applicable across industries, roles, and regions to help students prepare for success regardless of the field or region in which they are eventually employed. For instance, university faculty and administrators can use the results of the validation study to develop curricula and programs that will be better able to foster important competencies to ensure that their students are better prepared as they enter the workplace. The rubrics appended to this study provide proficiency levels that can be used to develop student assessments. Students can use the information to help them prepare for job search activities and even career guidance. Embedding the competencies in the curriculum, and assessing those competencies, can provide valuable information to students regarding professional development needed to improve skills acquisition.
Oftentimes, competency models focus on a single organization. Given the scope of this project, this competency model may be used more broadly for hiring decisions and employee development as well as academic curricula. Consistent with Succi and Canovi (2020), we suggest that the results be used to promote further collaboration between employers and academic programs to ensure students are being trained in the most relevant skills and that students understand employers' priorities. Universities and employers can focus on cultivating competencies that are more important for their specific region. Appendix B provides examples of a rubric that can be used to assess development of a particular competency, including descriptions of different proficiency levels that can be used to help assess where individuals currently fall and what they need to do to develop to the next level.

Directions for Research
Future research would benefit from measuring students' competency levels and following students through multiple time points to track their progress and development. Ideally, a study should attempt to track students for some portion of their academic careers and into their professional careers. Further, future research projects should find ways to include criterion measures for further validation of competency models and measures.

Conclusion
As competency modeling continues to become more prevalent, broad benefits exist not only for employers but also for academic programs to have a better understanding of what makes for highly competent workers in an increasingly global workforce. The information reported here is a contribution to both the competency modeling literature as well as the academic literature on students' workplace competency development. We developed the project collaboratively with a large network of universities and implemented strategies and recommendations from academic literature during development. The project and the data presented have farreaching implications for academia and industry, including (1) the validation of skills needed for students/graduates to work in the global economy, (2) a mechanism by which students can be evaluated in those skills at least prior to graduation, and (3) a mechanism by which programs can modify curricula to ensure that key competencies are met at graduation.

Competencies & Definitions
Achieving Objectives-Accepts or sets demanding individual goals; Meets individual goals and objectives; Takes initiative to seek additional responsibilities, as appropriate; Evaluates work outcomes to ensure quality standards are met.
Adapting to Change-Adjusts work style and interpersonal behavior to fit different situations and environments; Accepts and integrates new ideas and information on their merits; Supports and complies with change initiatives; Works effectively when faced with ambiguity.
Analyzing and Solving Problems-Critically evaluates information and its sources; Identifies gaps in information and seeks appropriate sources to close them; Synthesizes and integrates information into what is already known about a topic; Recognizes patterns in information to identify the bigger picture; Follows best practices and appropriately analyzes quantitative and qualitative data; Identifies and independently solves work problems, as appropriate; Considers multiple approaches when solving problems.
Applying a Global Mindset-Demonstrates interest in, and understanding of, other geographic regions, languages, and cultures; Recognizes own biases and balances local and global perspectives; Works effectively with a global community; Shows an understanding of other countries' standards, certifications, and processes.
Communicating in Writing-Writes professionally using proper grammar, punctuation, spelling, and vocabulary; Writes in an accurate, engaging manner, citing sources as appropriate; Writes in an organized, clear, and concise manner; Creates documents with structure, length, and language appropriate for the topic and audience; Communicates effectively in a non-native written language required for the job.
Communicating Orally-Organizes thoughts and speaks professionally, using proper language and vocabulary; Speaks clearly and displays confidence; Accurately communicates ideas and concepts verbally; Skillfully delivers formal presentations; Actively listens to others and adjusts to their needs; Communicates effectively in a non-native spoken language required for the job.
Cultivating a Strategic and Entrepreneurial Mindset-Understands own organization's offerings and keeps current on the offerings provided by organizations with competing or complementary services and/or products; Aligns own work with the organization's strategy and objectives; Monitors economic, market, social, and societal conditions and trends; Understands and acts upon financial metrics to minimize waste, improve efficiency, and maximize impact; Identifies and strategically addresses opportunities to grow offerings or expand into new areas.
Demonstrating Accountability-Works independently to achieve results; Takes ownership of work and follows through on commitments; Follows work policies, procedures, and guidelines; Appropriately questions authority in a culturally-sensitive manner when necessary; Assimilates to the values, standards, and culture of the organization.
Exhibiting Resilience-Recognizes own emotions and regulates how they are expressed; Maintains focus and productivity under pressure; Prioritizes personal well-being and work-life balance and diminishes the negative effects of stress; Develops and displays confidence in own capabilities despite obstacles or setbacks.
Generating Ideas and Innovating-Generates novel or innovative ideas within own and other areas of expertise; Displays openness to the ideas of others; Proactively identifies opportunities for positive changes to approaches, processes, or products; Demonstrates curiosity and appropriately experiments with new ideas to determine the benefits and risks associated with them.
Influencing Others-Offers suggestions and advocates for own ideas; Understands how own actions are interpreted by others and creates a positive impression; Navigates the formal and informal organizational structure; Sees issues from others' perspectives and effectively negotiates with them; Adapts style to gain agreement and commitment.
Leading Others-Provides guidance to others; Motivates and encourages others; Willingly shares information, trains and mentors others on areas of expertise; Develops and communicates a compelling vision that is aligned with the organizational strategy.
Learning and Self-Development-Identifies and addresses own knowledge gaps and training needs; Continually expands own knowledge and skills; Applies knowledge and training to professional contexts; Critically evaluates own strengths and weaknesses and pursues development; Seeks feedback and learns from successes and failures; Learns from others and seeks mentors.
Leveraging Technology-Applies technology tools and techniques to gather and store information; Uses technology and visual aids to facilitate and enhance communications; Leverages standard technology and applications to complete work; Applies profession-specific or other specialized applications to complete work; Stays up-to-date on technological changes.

Managing the Work of Others-Delegates work tasks to others; Monitors performance of team members; Provides others with clear direction and expectations; Provides feedback and coaching to others.
Meeting Customer/Stakeholder Expectations-Understands and meets internal and external customer/stakeholder needs and expectations; Responds to customer/stakeholder requests in a timely manner; Balances customer/stakeholder demands with the organization's objectives.
Planning and Organizing-Sets project objectives, strategies, and milestones; Tracks progress toward project completion; Plans and prioritizes activities, and adjusts plans based on changes; Identifies and obtains the resources needed to accomplish work; Manages time effectively and completes work on schedule.
Upholding Ethical Standards and Demonstrating Social Responsibility-Recognizes ethical challenges and maintains ethical standards; Interacts honestly and transparently with others; Demonstrates integrity and builds trust by keeping promises and admitting mistakes; Acts responsibly to minimize the negative effects of own choices on other individuals, the community, and the environment; Maintains confidentiality of information; Makes sustainable social improvements.

Working Well With Others-Develops and maintains effective working relationships; Interacts effectively with people from different backgrounds; Listens to others and values and incorporates diverse viewpoints;
Supports team decisions once they have been made; Adjusts own workload to help meet team commitments, as appropriate; Recognizes and demonstrates empathy for others' feelings, needs, and concerns; Appropriately resolves own work disagreements.

Evaluates the basic advantages and disadvantages of alternative options
Evaluates the feasibility, desirability, and expected consequences of alternative options Thoroughly evaluates the feasibility, desirability, and potential short-and long-term consequences of different options, as well as their impact on various stakeholder groups

C. Makes sound decisions based on available information
Considers available information when making decisions, but may occasionally over-rely on intuition or demonstrate some logical flaws in reasoning Appropriately balances intuition with verified information when making decisions and avoids logical flaws in reasoning Makes sound decisions based on the integration of available information and intuition gained from relevant experience; exhibits highly logical and sound reasoning

D. Makes decisions in a timely manner
Makes straightforward decisions in a reasonable amount of time

A. Identifies and addresses own knowledge gaps and training needs
Recognizes own knowledge gaps and training needs once they have been pointed out by others, and exerts some effort to close those gaps Independently recognizes own knowledge gaps and training needs in area of expertise, and exerts deliberate effort to close any gaps Proactively seeks to identify knowledge gaps and training needs in own and related areas of expertise, and systematically exerts effort to close those gaps

B. Continually expands own knowledge and skills
Attends mandatory courses/training programs and reads assigned documents to expand skills and knowledge in own field of expertise Independently seeks opportunities to attend optional relevant training programs and searches for supplemental reading to expand skills and knowledge in own field of expertise Independently develops informal or formal self-learning programs in a strategic manner to ensure a constant expansion of knowledge and skills in own and related fields of expertise

C. Applies knowledge and training to professional contexts
Is generally able to apply new knowledge to work tasks, but may have difficulty when the application of knowledge to the task is less obvious or out of context Frequently and effectively applies new knowledge to work tasks Consistently seeks and identifies novel ways to apply relevant knowledge to a wide variety of work tasks and practical applications

D. Critically evaluates own strengths and weaknesses and pursues development
Recognizes own obvious strengths and weaknesses, and works to improve areas requiring immediate development

Regularly evaluates own strengths and weaknesses and pursues opportunities to develop in necessary areas
Systematically evaluates own strengths and weaknesses, critically evaluating both obvious and subtle areas for development and strategically pursuing opportunities for both short and long-term professional development Has a basic knowledge of standard technology and applications, and uses these tools to perform work with minimal guidance Has a broad knowledge of standard technology and applications and requires no guidance in using these tools Has a comprehensive knowledge of standard technology and applications; is seen by others as an expert in their application and identifies new applications for enhancing own and others' productivity