career-ladder-map
Map where you are against the next level and build a concrete plan to close the gap. Use when asked to map a career ladder, find the gap to the next level, build a development/growth plan, or figure out what to work on to get promoted. Produces a level-gap map — current vs. target competencies side by side, the specific gaps, and a prioritised 1–2 quarter plan of evidence-generating projects to close them.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills /tmp/career-ladder-map && cp -r /tmp/career-ladder-map/plugins/pm-career/skills/career-ladder-map ~/.claude/skills/career-ladder-mapSKILL.md
# Career Ladder Map Skill "How do I get to the next level?" usually gets a vague answer. This skill makes it concrete: lay your current demonstrated competencies next to the **target** level's, find the real gaps, and turn each into a specific project that will *generate the evidence* a [`promotion-packet`](../promotion-packet/SKILL.md) needs. A plan, not a pep talk. ## Required Inputs Ask for these only if they aren't already provided: - **Current level → target level**, and the **ladder/rubric** for both (the competencies each expects). - **Your current evidence** — what you've demonstrated and where (a [`brag-doc`](../brag-doc/SKILL.md) helps). - **Constraints** — your role's scope, time, and what opportunities are realistically available. ## Output Format ### Career Ladder Map — [name], [current] → [target] **1. Side-by-side** — each competency at current vs. target, with your honest status: | Competency | Target-level bar | Where I am now | Gap | |---|---|---|---| | e.g. Scope of influence | multi-team | strong within my team | 🟡 partial | Status: 🟢 already demonstrating · 🟡 partial / inconsistent · 🔴 not yet. **2. The real gaps** — the 2–4 competencies (🔴/🟡) that actually stand between you and the level. Be honest — a flattering map wastes quarters. **3. Evidence-generating plan** — for each gap, a **specific project** that would create the proof, plus how you'd get the opportunity (ask your manager, volunteer, scope it yourself): | Gap | Project that proves it | Opportunity / ask | By when | |---|---|---|---| **4. Sequencing** — what to focus on this quarter vs. next (you can't close every gap at once; pick the highest-signal ones). **5. Manager alignment** — what to confirm with your manager so you're calibrated on the *same* bar (the #1 cause of surprise "not yet"s). ## Quality Checks - [ ] Both levels are mapped against the actual rubric, not a generic guess - [ ] Your current status is honest (🟢/🟡/🔴), not aspirational - [ ] Each gap has a **specific project** that generates evidence — not "get better at X" - [ ] The plan names how you'll get the opportunity, not just the goal - [ ] It's sequenced (this quarter vs. next), and includes a manager-calibration step ## Anti-Patterns - [ ] Do not produce a flattering self-assessment — an honest 🔴 you can fix beats a 🟢 the committee disagrees with - [ ] Do not list goals without the project that proves them — "show more leadership" isn't a plan - [ ] Do not try to close every gap at once — sequence by signal; depth beats breadth - [ ] Do not skip manager calibration — closing gaps against a bar your manager doesn't share leads to a surprise "not yet" - [ ] Do not confuse activity with evidence — the project has to produce a demonstrable, level-appropriate outcome ## Based On Career-ladder / competency-framework practice — gap analysis against the target level and evidence-led development planning.
Conduct a structured ethical review of an AI or ML feature, model, or product. Use when preparing to deploy an AI system, assessing algorithmic risk, auditing a model for bias, or producing a responsible AI impact assessment. Produces a structured ethics review covering fairness, transparency, privacy, safety, accountability, and societal impact with a risk tier score, pre-deployment checklist, and prioritised mitigations.
Structure AI and ML product decisions with the rigour of any product decision. Use when building AI-powered features, evaluating LLM integrations, designing AI products, or assessing AI readiness. Produces a complete AI product canvas covering problem definition, model approach, data requirements, evaluation framework, UX design, responsible AI checklist, and launch monitoring plan.
Transform feature briefs into structured design briefs that give designers the context they need before opening Figma. Use when asked to write a design brief, create a design handoff, brief a designer on a new feature, or translate a PRD into design requirements. Produces a brief with user goal, emotional context, success criteria, constraints, edge cases, and out-of-scope boundaries.
Design statistically rigorous A/B tests and interpret experiment results. Use when asked to design an experiment, run an A/B test, calculate sample size, interpret test results, or assess whether an experiment was successful. Produces a complete experiment design with hypothesis, sample size, run time, success criteria, and risk flags — or a results interpretation with ship/iterate/kill recommendation.
Synthesises user signals from multiple research sources into a unified, weighted insight brief. Use when you have data from interviews, support tickets, NPS verbatims, app reviews, or sales calls and need to reconcile contradictions, surface the underlying need behind requests, or answer 'what are users really telling us'. Produces ranked insights with confidence ratings, source weighting rationale, divergent signal analysis by user segment, and a research gap identification section.
Structure a product data analysis, metric deep-dive, funnel analysis, or cohort study. Use when asked to analyse product metrics, investigate a drop in conversion, explain a data change to stakeholders, or find the root cause of a metric movement. Produces a structured analysis with question, root cause, confidence level, and recommended action.
Interpret product metrics against goals and surface actionable signals. Use when asked to analyse product health, review key metrics, investigate a performance issue, produce a health report, or assess product-market fit signals. Produces a structured health report with RAG status, trend analysis, root cause hypotheses, and prioritised actions.
Structure a retention analysis, churn investigation, or engagement deep-dive for any product team. Use when asked to analyse user retention, investigate churn, measure DAU/MAU, or build a retention improvement plan. Produces a retention snapshot with root cause hypotheses, aha-moment correlation, and prioritised interventions.