Competency Framework Examples by Role: Templates 2026

Most competency frameworks fail in the same way: they read like a corporate values poster, contain too many overlapping items, lack behavioral indicators that two managers would calibrate the same way, and are never reviewed once the launch deck is archived. The frameworks that survive — and actually drive performance reviews, 360 feedback, promotion calibration, and learning paths — are the ones with role-specific templates, observable behaviors, and a deliberate cadence of refresh. This guide is the practitioner reference for building those frameworks from scratch, with competency framework examples by role for the eight roles every mid-market HR team has to cover.

We cover the four layers of a modern model (core, leadership, functional, role-specific), eight role-specific competency framework templates with 5-7 competencies and behavioral indicators each, the rules for writing observable indicators, a 6-step build process, the bridge from competencies to 360 feedback questions, and how AI-assisted competency framework generation actually works in 2026. The examples are drawn from the canonical literature — McClelland (1973), the Spencer & Spencer competency dictionary (1993), Korn Ferry's Leadership Architect, the SHRM body of competency, AIHR research, and Bersin/Deloitte talent capability frameworks — and adapted for European mid-market reality.

For the assessment side of the workflow, see our 360-degree feedback guide and the 360 feedback questions examples library that maps directly to the competencies below. For tooling, the best free 360 feedback tools and the AI-powered 360 feedback guide. For the manager workflow that operationalises competencies in weekly conversations, see the 1-on-1 meeting template with AI prep.

What a Competency Framework Actually Does (vs Job Descriptions, vs Skills Inventories)

A competency framework is a structured catalogue of the observable behaviors, knowledge areas, and abilities that explain why high performers in a role outperform average performers. The concept is canonically attributed to David McClelland's 1973 paper "Testing for Competence Rather Than for Intelligence" — the founding argument that traditional aptitude tests poorly predict on-the-job performance, whereas behavioral patterns observable in actual work do. Spencer & Spencer's 1993 Competence at Work consolidated McClelland's research into a working competency dictionary of 21 generic competencies with five-level behavioral scales, and Korn Ferry's Leadership Architect (formerly Lominger) productised the approach into the 38 competencies that became the de-facto reference for executive development.

Three artefacts are often confused. A job description documents the role's accountability, responsibilities, reporting lines, and qualifications — it answers "what does this person do?" A skills inventory catalogues the technical and functional skills present in the workforce — it answers "who can do what?" A competency framework answers "what behaviors distinguish strong performance in this role?" The three are complementary, not substitutes: SHRM's body of competency explicitly positions the framework as the bridge between job design (descriptions) and capability planning (inventories), feeding into hiring, performance reviews, succession planning, and learning paths.

The pragmatic test for whether your organisation actually needs a competency framework is whether you have any of the following procurement-grade questions to answer: how do we calibrate promotions across business units? How do we structure 360 feedback questions consistently? How do we build learning paths that map to actual development needs? How do we defend a termination based on performance? In each case the answer is a role-specific competency model with behavioral indicators that two managers would score the same way for the same employee.

The 4 Layers of a Modern Competency Framework

Modern competency frameworks — those that survive AIHR scrutiny and Bersin/Deloitte capability audits — are organised in four layers, each answering a different question and applied at a different level of the organisation. Conflating the layers is the most common authoring error and produces the unmanageable 60-competency catalogues that nobody uses.

Layer 1 — Core competencies. The 4-6 behaviors expected of every employee regardless of role or level: typically integrity/ethics, customer focus, collaboration, accountability, learning agility, and adaptability. These are the cultural backbone, not the differentiators. Spencer & Spencer's "achievement orientation" and "concern for order" sit here, alongside the core competencies a CHRO would defend in a values audit.

Layer 2 — Leadership competencies. The 5-7 behaviors expected of anyone with people management responsibility, scaling in expected level from first-time manager to executive. Korn Ferry's Leadership Architect taxonomy — strategic mindset, business insight, drives results, develops talent, builds effective teams, manages ambiguity, courage — is the most-used reference. These apply only to leadership roles; pinning them on individual contributors creates the "manage up" anti-pattern that drives engagement scores down.

Layer 3 — Functional competencies. The 4-6 behaviors specific to a function (Engineering, Sales, Marketing, Finance, HR, Operations) but generic across levels within that function. SHRM publishes functional models for HR; the CFA Institute publishes one for Finance; the ISTQB for QA; AIHR maintains a comparative reference for HR functional competencies. Core competencies vs functional competencies is the distinction that separates "applies to everyone" from "applies to everyone in this function."

Layer 4 — Role-specific competencies. The 3-5 behaviors specific to a single role (Senior Backend Engineer, Enterprise Account Executive, Customer Success Manager, Director of Product). These are the most volatile layer — they change as the role evolves — and the highest-leverage layer for hiring scorecards, calibration, and learning paths.

A well-designed framework typically allocates: 4-5 core, 5-6 leadership (only for managers), 4-5 functional, 3-5 role-specific. How many competencies should a framework have per role? The defensible total is 12-18 — enough to capture the behavioral signal, few enough that a 360 rater can score them in 15 minutes without satisficing.

Competency Framework Examples by Role

The eight role-specific competency framework templates below are practitioner-grade — what we use when AI-generating a first draft from a job description in Torch, then iterating with HR. Each lists 5-7 competencies with a short behavioral indicator at the "meets expectations" level. For the full 3-5 level scales you would translate each indicator into Below / Approaches / Meets / Exceeds / Role Model, calibrated against actual employees.

1. Individual Contributor (Early Career, 0-3 Years)

The first competency framework for individual contributors applies to junior IC roles across functions — analysts, associates, junior engineers, coordinators. The behavioral pattern is learning velocity over output volume.

• Learning agility — Asks clarifying questions early; integrates feedback within one week; documents learnings to avoid re-asking.
• Task ownership — Delivers committed tasks on time; flags blockers within 24 hours; updates ticket status without prompting.
• Quality discipline — Reviews own work before submission; tests edge cases; produces documentation peers can use.
• Collaboration — Contributes constructively in stand-ups; supports peers when capacity allows; gives credit explicitly.
• Communication clarity — Writes status updates a non-expert can follow; uses the right channel for the message; closes loops.
• Adaptability — Re-prioritises gracefully when context shifts; works through ambiguity without paralysis.

2. Senior Individual Contributor / Specialist (4-8 Years)

Senior ICs and specialists shift from learning velocity to compounding contribution: shaping the work, multiplying others, owning ambiguous problems.

• Technical depth — Recognised authority in 1-2 specialist areas; teaches others; sets quality standards.
• Problem framing — Reframes ambiguous problems into actionable scopes; surfaces tradeoffs explicitly; chooses the simpler design when it fits.
• Multiplier behavior — Code reviews, mentoring, internal documentation that compounds team output beyond own keyboard.
• Stakeholder management — Negotiates scope with PMs and customers; says no with rationale; manages expectations early.
• Strategic context — Connects daily work to quarterly OKRs; flags work that no longer maps to current priorities.
• Bias for delivery — Ships in increments; closes long-tail tasks; prefers a working v0.5 to a slide-decked v1.
• Calm under pressure — Owns incidents without blame; communicates status during outages; runs blameless post-mortems.

3. First-Time Manager (Team Lead, 5-12 Reports)

The transition from senior IC to first-time manager is the highest-failure transition in the AIHR longitudinal data. The competency framework should explicitly de-emphasise the behaviors that earned the promotion (technical mastery) and emphasise the behaviors that determine survival.

• Coaching conversations — Holds weekly 1-on-1s; gives developmental feedback in the moment; uses GROW or similar frame.
• Goal setting and OKRs — Translates strategy into team objectives; writes measurable key results; tracks weekly.
• Performance management — Names underperformance early; documents specifics; manages out compassionately when needed.
• Hiring and onboarding — Runs structured interviews; uses scorecards; onboards new hires with a 30-60-90 plan.
• Delegation — Delegates decision authority, not just tasks; resists rescuing; coaches through stuck moments.
• Psychological safety — Models vulnerability; runs blameless retros; protects junior voices in meetings.
• Self-management — Knows when to step back from IC work; manages own energy and calendar; recognises burnout signals.

4. Mid-Level Manager (Manager of Managers)

Managing managers is a fundamentally different role: the work product is the managers themselves, not the deliverables their teams ship.

• Leader development — Coaches direct-report managers on their coaching; runs skip-levels; promotes from within.
• Cross-team coordination — Resolves dependencies between teams; runs effective steering committees; protects team focus from drive-by requests.
• Operating cadence — Runs weekly business reviews, monthly OKR check-ins, quarterly retrospectives without slipping.
• Talent calibration — Drives consistent ratings across managers; spots calibration drift; defends ratings with evidence.
• Strategic execution — Translates function strategy into team plans; sequences initiatives; kills work that no longer matters.
• Organisational design — Reshapes team structure as the function scales; defines decision rights; clarifies accountability.
• Stakeholder influence — Negotiates with peer functions; influences without authority; represents the function externally.

5. Director / Function Head

Directors own a function (or a major sub-function). The behavioral signal is strategic ownership over execution mastery.

• Function strategy — Owns the 1-3 year function plan; aligns it to company strategy; communicates it concisely.
• Capital allocation — Allocates headcount, budget, and time to highest-leverage initiatives; cuts low-ROI work.
• Talent magnet — Attracts senior talent; retains key leaders; builds the bench two layers down.
• Cross-functional leadership — Partners with peer Directors; co-owns shared OKRs; arbitrates tradeoffs.
• Operational excellence — Runs the function with predictability; surfaces leading indicators; manages risk proactively.
• External representation — Speaks at industry events, customer briefings, board reviews; represents the function with credibility.

6. VP / Executive (C-Suite, SVP, Founding Team)

Executive-level competencies map closely to Korn Ferry's Leadership Architect top tier and to the Lominger "Choices" research on derailers.

• Strategic mindset — Sees three moves ahead; reframes problems at the right altitude; writes the board memo without help.
• Business acumen — Reads the P&L fluently; understands unit economics; ties decisions to enterprise value creation.
• Builds effective teams — Hires senior leaders, develops successors, runs the executive team as a high-performing unit.
• Drives results through others — Sets the bar; holds the bar; replaces leaders who do not hold the bar.
• Manages ambiguity — Makes decisions with 70% information; reverses them when wrong without ego.
• Courage — Says hard things to peers and the board; takes unpopular positions when warranted; protects the long-term.
• Self-awareness — Knows the derailers (perfectionism, micromanagement, conflict avoidance); seeks feedback actively; develops in public.

7. Customer-Facing Role (Sales / Customer Success)

Sales and CS roles share the customer-facing behavioral pattern but split on hunter (Sales) vs farmer (CS) emphasis. This template covers both.

• Customer empathy — Understands customer outcomes beyond stated requirements; maps decision processes; builds trust.
• Discovery and qualification — Asks open questions; surfaces budget, authority, need, timing; disqualifies efficiently.
• Value articulation — Translates product features into customer outcomes; quantifies ROI; tells the story without slides.
• Negotiation — Holds price; trades concessions for commitments; closes when the buyer is ready.
• Pipeline discipline — Maintains accurate CRM hygiene; forecasts within 10%; surfaces stuck deals early.
• Cross-functional collaboration — Engages CS, Product, Engineering on customer escalations; champions feedback into the roadmap.
• Resilience — Recovers from rejection; learns from lost deals; maintains activity through quarter-end stress.

8. Technical Role (Software Engineering)

Engineering competencies align with the levelling guides published by Square, Stripe, Rent the Runway, and CircleCI, plus the SHRM functional model for technical roles.

• Technical excellence — Writes maintainable, tested, documented code; reviews peers' work substantively; raises the bar on the codebase.
• Systems thinking — Understands the system end-to-end; designs for failure modes; chooses boring technology when it fits.
• Product sensibility — Asks why before how; pushes back on poorly-scoped requirements; ships v0.5 to learn.
• Operational ownership — Owns code through production; on-call without complaint; drives reliability improvements.
• Engineering leverage — Builds tools, frameworks, and documentation that compound team velocity beyond own commits.
• Technical communication — Writes RFCs reviewers want to read; explains tradeoffs to non-engineers; documents decisions.
• Continuous learning — Stays current with the stack; spikes on new technologies; brings learnings back to the team.

How to Write Good Behavioral Indicators

The behavioral indicators are the load-bearing element of the entire framework. Done well, two managers score the same employee within one level on the same competency. Done poorly, the framework collapses into Rorschach scores that drive calibration arguments and burn HR's credibility.

Spencer & Spencer's original competency dictionary uses five-level scales — typically Below / Approaches / Meets / Exceeds / Role Model — with each level anchored to an observable behavior, not an adjective. The rules that separate scoreable indicators from posters:

1. Observable, not internal. "Demonstrates strategic thinking" is not observable; "Articulates a 12-month strategy in writing, with risks named" is observable. Strip every "demonstrates," "displays," "shows" verb that requires interpretation, and replace with an actual action a third party would witness.

2. Frequency or scope, not adjectives. "Excellent communicator" is unscorable; "Holds weekly 1-on-1s with every direct report; runs monthly skip-levels; sends a written update every Friday" is scorable. Each level differs by frequency, scope, audience, or stake — not by the intensity of an adjective.

3. Calibratable across managers. Test each indicator with the question: "would two managers, looking at the same evidence, score this employee within one level?" If the answer requires a 30-minute discussion, rewrite.

4. Three to five levels. Three levels is the minimum for distinguishing development needs; five is the practical maximum before scorers satisfice. Avoid seven-level scales — research from DDI and SHRM shows scorer reliability collapses past five.

5. Anchored to actual employees. The fastest calibration shortcut: name two real employees per level. "At the Role Model level, this looks like Sara in Q2 2025 when she..." removes ambiguity faster than any rubric.

Building a Competency Framework from Scratch — 6-Step Process

The 6-step process below is the practitioner consolidation of AIHR's framework methodology, SHRM's body of competency, and Bersin/Deloitte capability planning. It is designed for a 200-2,000 employee mid-market organisation with 15-30 distinct roles. Time to first usable draft: 3-6 weeks with a small working group; AI-assisted (see next section): 1-2 weeks.

Step 1 — Anchor on strategy and role inventory (Week 1). Before writing any competency, list the company's 1-3 year strategic priorities and the 15-30 roles that exist in the organisation. The framework must serve the strategy: a "speed" company needs different competencies from a "regulatory excellence" company. Cluster roles into role families (IC, Manager, Director, Executive, plus functional families: Engineering, Sales, CS, Operations, etc.).

Step 2 — Define the four layers (Week 1-2). Author the 4-6 core competencies that every employee must demonstrate. Author the 5-7 leadership competencies that scale across manager levels. Author the 4-6 functional competencies per function. Defer the role-specific layer to Step 4.

Step 3 — Validate against high performers (Week 2-3). McClelland's original methodology — Behavioral Event Interview — interviews 10-12 high performers and 10-12 average performers, asks for stories of recent success and failure, and codes the differences. The compressed modern version: 6-8 interviews per role family, 60 minutes each, with a structured BEI protocol. The output validates which draft competencies actually distinguish high performance and surfaces missing ones.

Step 4 — Author role-specific competencies (Week 3-4). For each of the 15-30 roles, write 3-5 role-specific competencies on top of the layered base. Use the eight templates above as starting points. Validate with role incumbents and their managers — they will catch authoring errors faster than HR alone.

Step 5 — Write 3-5 level behavioral indicators (Week 4-5). For every competency, write the level descriptors per the rules above. Calibrate against named real employees. Run a pilot scoring exercise on 10 employees with two managers each to surface ambiguous indicators.

Step 6 — Operationalise and review cadence (Week 5-6). Embed the framework in performance reviews, 360 feedback, hiring scorecards, learning paths, and promotion decisions. Define the review cadence: a full refresh every 24 months (or earlier if strategy changes), a light refresh every 6-12 months. The framework that is never reviewed is the framework that loses credibility.

Linking Competencies to 360 Feedback Questions

The competency framework is the upstream artefact; the 360 feedback question library is its operational expression. Every competency in the framework should map to 2-4 questions in the 360 instrument, and every 360 question should trace back to a competency. Drift in either direction — orphan questions or unmeasured competencies — is the most common failure of long-running 360 programmes.

For the "coaching conversations" competency in the first-time manager template, the corresponding 360 questions might be: "How effectively does this manager hold regular 1-on-1s with you?" (frequency), "How developmental is the feedback you receive?" (quality), "Does this manager surface tough feedback in the moment, or save it for the review?" (timeliness), and "How well does the manager listen during 1-on-1s?" (skill). Four questions, one competency, scoreable on a 5-point scale, supplemented with one open comment per competency.

See our full 360 feedback questions examples library for the question bank organised by competency, and the 360-degree feedback guide for the rater design and aggregation methodology. The shortest path to a defensible 360 programme is to author the competency framework first, then derive the questions — never the reverse.

AI-Assisted Competency Framework: First Draft from Job Descriptions

The 2026 evolution of competency framework authoring is AI-assisted generation: feed the job description, the company values, and the strategic priorities into a model fine-tuned on the canonical literature (McClelland, Spencer, Korn Ferry, SHRM, AIHR) and receive a first-draft competency framework with behavioral indicators in 30 seconds. The HR practitioner then iterates.

KS-Agents Torch implements this workflow: the AI competency framework generator ingests the job description, applies the four-layer model, and produces a draft with 4 core / 5 leadership (if applicable) / 4 functional / 4 role-specific competencies and 5-level behavioral indicators per competency. The HR practitioner reviews, edits, calibrates against named employees, and publishes. The same generator feeds the 360 question library — every published competency automatically suggests 3-4 calibrated questions, closing the loop from framework to assessment.

The bias-detection layer is the procurement-critical detail. AI-generated competency frameworks risk inheriting biases from training data — gendered language, ableist assumptions, age-coded behaviors. Torch runs a bias scan on every draft before HR review, flagging language patterns the EDPB and CNIL have called out in their HR-AI guidance. During 360 cycles a second bias-detection layer runs on rater patterns within each competency, flagging suspicious clustering that suggests halo effects, in-group/out-group bias, or recency bias affecting specific demographics. See our AI-powered 360 feedback guide for the full methodology.

The honest caveats: AI-generated frameworks are first drafts, not final products. Behavioral Event Interviews (Step 3 above) remain the highest-quality validation method, and the named-employee calibration (Step 5) cannot be automated. The AI saves the 60-80 hours of authoring; the 30-40 hours of validation and calibration remain human work.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Across hundreds of mid-market competency framework deployments, the same six mistakes recur — each one cheap to avoid in authoring, expensive to fix after launch.

Too many competencies. The 60-competency framework is unmanageable; the 12-18 competency framework per role is workable. If the draft exceeds 18, consolidate overlapping items. AIHR research shows scorer reliability collapses past 20 competencies in a single review cycle.

Abstract language. "Demonstrates strategic thinking" reads well in a values poster and scores nothing in a review cycle. Replace every abstract verb with an observable action.

No behavioral anchors. A competency without 3-5 level indicators is not a competency, it is a label. The behavioral anchors are the entire utility of the framework.

No review cycle. Frameworks that are never refreshed lose alignment with strategy and credibility with managers. Define the 24-month full-refresh cadence at launch, or accept a 5-year obsolete artefact.

Authored in HR, dropped on the business. Frameworks authored without role incumbents, without manager pilot scoring, without BEI validation are rejected on first contact with the business. Co-author with a working group spanning HR, three functions, and three levels.

Conflated layers. Putting "strategic thinking" in the core layer means individual contributors get scored on a leadership behavior they have no scope for. Keep the four layers separate, and apply each only where it belongs.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a competency framework with examples?

A competency framework is a structured catalogue of the observable behaviors that distinguish strong performance in a role. Examples include the 38-competency Korn Ferry Leadership Architect, the SHRM body of competency for HR professionals, Spencer & Spencer's 21 generic competencies, and the eight role-specific templates above (individual contributor, senior IC, first-time manager, mid-level manager, director, VP, customer-facing, technical). Each competency has 3-5 behavioral indicators at observable levels (Below / Approaches / Meets / Exceeds / Role Model).

What are the 4 main types of competencies?

The 4 main types of competencies map to the four layers of a modern framework: core competencies (apply to every employee — integrity, collaboration, accountability, learning agility), leadership competencies (apply to anyone managing people — coaching, talent development, strategic execution), functional competencies (apply within a function — Engineering, Sales, Finance, HR), and role-specific competencies (apply to a single role — Senior Backend Engineer, Enterprise AE). Each layer answers a different question and scales to a different population.

How do I build a competency framework from scratch?

Use the 6-step process: (1) anchor on strategy and role inventory; (2) define the four layers — core, leadership, functional, role-specific; (3) validate against high performers using Behavioral Event Interviews; (4) author role-specific competencies for each of the 15-30 roles; (5) write 3-5 level behavioral indicators per competency, calibrated against named employees; (6) operationalise across performance reviews, 360 feedback, hiring scorecards, and learning paths, with a 24-month review cadence. Time to first draft: 3-6 weeks manual, 1-2 weeks AI-assisted.

What are core competencies vs functional competencies?

Core competencies vs functional competencies is the distinction that separates "applies to everyone" from "applies to everyone in this function." Core competencies (4-6 per organisation) are the cultural backbone — typically integrity, collaboration, accountability, learning agility — applied to every employee regardless of role or level. Functional competencies (4-6 per function) are specific to a function such as Engineering, Sales, Finance, HR, applied to every employee within that function regardless of level.

How many competencies should a framework have?

The defensible total per role is 12-18 competencies — enough to capture the behavioral signal across the four layers, few enough that a 360 rater can score them in 15 minutes without satisficing. A typical allocation: 4-5 core, 5-6 leadership (only for managers, otherwise 0), 4-5 functional, 3-5 role-specific. AIHR research shows scorer reliability collapses past 20 competencies in a single review cycle.

What's the difference between competencies and skills?

Competencies vs skills is the distinction between behaviors and capabilities. Skills are technical or functional capabilities — Python, financial modelling, contract negotiation — that someone either possesses or does not. Competencies are observable behaviors that combine skills, knowledge, and dispositions to produce strong performance — "drives results through others" is a competency that integrates multiple skills. Skills inventories track who can do what; competency frameworks track who behaves how.

Can AI generate a competency framework?

Yes, AI can generate a first-draft competency framework from a job description, company values, and strategic priorities in 30 seconds — applying the four-layer model and producing 12-18 competencies with 5-level behavioral indicators per role. KS-Agents Torch implements this workflow with bias detection on the generated language and automatic mapping to a 360 question library. The honest caveat: AI-generated drafts are starting points, not final products. Behavioral Event Interviews and named-employee calibration remain human work.

How often should a competency framework be reviewed?

A full refresh every 24 months is the practitioner standard, with a light refresh every 6-12 months for role-specific layers that change faster (technical roles in particular). Trigger an off-cycle refresh when company strategy shifts materially, when a major function is added or restructured, or when calibration data shows scorer reliability dropping. Frameworks never refreshed lose alignment with strategy and credibility with managers within 5 years.

Are there free competency framework templates?

Yes. The eight role-specific templates above are free to adapt. Korn Ferry publishes the Leadership Architect taxonomy summary openly; SHRM publishes the body of competency for HR professionals; AIHR publishes comparative functional competency frameworks; the European Skills, Competences, Qualifications and Occupations (ESCO) classification — open-source from the European Commission — provides a free reference for over 13,000 occupations. AIHR's free competency framework template, Bersin/Deloitte capability briefs, and the McKinsey skills taxonomy are additional starting points.

How do competencies link to performance reviews?

Competencies are the structure of the performance review: each review item maps to a competency, each competency has 3-5 level behavioral indicators, the rater scores against the indicators, the aggregate score becomes the performance rating. The same competencies feed 360 feedback questions (2-4 questions per competency), hiring scorecards (the same indicators applied to candidates), and learning paths (development resources mapped to each competency). Competencies are the upstream artefact; performance reviews, 360, hiring, and learning are downstream applications.

Start Free: AI-Generate Your Competency Framework in 30 Seconds

Reading templates is one thing; generating a working competency framework for your specific roles is another. KS-Agents Torch ships an AI competency framework generator that ingests your job descriptions and produces draft frameworks with 5-level behavioral indicators, plus the linked 360 question library that operationalises them in your next review cycle.

KS-Agents 360° Starter is free forever for teams up to 10 employees, no credit card and no time limit. Generate your first competency framework, run a pilot 360 cycle on a leadership cohort, surface the report, and work through the post-cycle coaching prompts in the next round of 1:1s before deciding whether to graduate to the flat €49/month Unlimited tier.

→ Start free with KS-Agents 360° or see how Torch connects competency frameworks to weekly leadership coaching.

For deeper reading, see our 360-degree feedback guide, the 360 feedback questions examples library that maps directly to the competencies above, the best free 360 feedback tools listicle, the AI-powered 360 feedback guide, and the 1-on-1 meeting template with AI prep for the manager workflow that operationalises competencies in weekly conversations.