E.23.CDI:11 - SoTA-Echoing
The comparison below asks which current practice changes the capability-development action at comparable effort. Standards and competency catalogues are treated as current practice references, not as ontology authority or proof that a holder is capable. Domain-bounded reviews remain qualified to their studied populations and interventions.
| Practice line and current source | Contribution, effort, and failure boundary | Decision and receiving loci |
|---|---|---|
| Results-led performance improvement | ISPI, Performance Standards (current official page checked 2026-08-22), requires focus on results, a systemic view, need and cause analysis, solution design and implementation, and evaluation of impact: https://www.ispi.international/performance-standards. This helps prevent training or tooling from being selected before the performance gap and cause are known. Its consulting and organizational framing adds stakeholder-analysis effort and is not a capability ontology for every human, robotic, AI, collective, equipped, or hybrid holder. | Adapt. Steps 1–6 and CC-E23CDI-2 through CC-E23CDI-4 adopt result-before-intervention, limiting-contribution, systemic-effect, and protected-condition moves. Reject a universal consulting workflow or certification form. |
| Maintained competence management and people development | ISO 10015:2019, confirmed current in 2025, connects organizational competence management and people development to product/service conformity and stakeholder needs: https://www.iso.org/standard/69459.html. It gives a useful maintained organizational branch, but its people-development scope neither covers technical holders nor proves transfer in named Work. Maintaining its full management system can dominate a bounded one-holder use. | Adapt for human and organizational cases. Steps 2–3 and 8 keep current measures, qualification/currentness, desired result, and refresh. Reject as the universal CDI Method and do not require a management system for the two-sentence entry. |
| Workplace training transfer | Transfer of workplace e-learning: A systematic literature review (2025), DOI 10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101407, finds no common mature transfer framework in its 31-study corpus, frequent reliance on self-report, and few objective measures; it also distinguishes transfer across task and context dimensions. The evidence is specific to workplace e-learning and does not establish a technical-system or organization-wide capability Method. | Adapt the measurement warning. Step 7, both worked cases, and CC-E23CDI-5 require the declared target in representative Work and do not accept attendance, course completion, or self-report alone. Reject the assumption that one training setting transfers automatically to another envelope or window. |
| Deliberate practice | Nurse et al., The influence of deliberate practice on skill performance in therapeutic practice: A systematic review of early studies (2024), DOI 10.1080/10503307.2024.2308159, reports preliminary support for focused objectives, guidance, feedback, and repeated refinement but limited evidence and little basis for a settled best delivery form. The studies concern discrete therapeutic skills, not every capability holder or Work family. | Adapt only when the limiting contribution is a refinable skill and representative feedback is available; this is one possible intervention in step 5. Reject deliberate practice, repetition, coaching, or expert guidance as the default CDI architecture. |
| Organizational dynamic-capability research | Making sense of dynamic capabilities in international firms: Review, analysis, integration, and extension (2024), DOI 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2024.102260, exposes both useful reconfiguration questions and continuing terminology ambiguity across a 98-article international-business corpus. Its strategic constructs can guide an organization-level inquiry, but they do not identify one holder’s qualified A.2.2 ability, measure set, transfer result, or causal relation. The abstraction cost is high for a local development decision. | Adapt only the changing-environment and reconfiguration cue. Step 8 reopens the baseline, target, or intervention when the operating environment changes. Reject a dynamic-capability label as the holder capability, transfer evidence, or substitute for the direct relations in CC-E23CDI-6. |
| Systems-engineering competency development | INCOSE, Systems Engineering Competency Framework, 2nd ed. (2025), supplies 37 tailorable competencies for individual or organizational assessment and development and explicitly expects domain tailoring: https://www.incose.org/resources-publications/publish-with-incose/competency-framework/. A competency catalogue can help a systems-engineering domain name candidate contributions and desired levels, but a catalogue level, role label, or assessment row is not the exact holder’s bounded capability or representative Work result. Tailoring and assessment also carry real effort. | Adapt as domain filling. Step 1 may use the tailored framework to identify relevant SE Methods and contributions; steps 2–3 must still establish the holder-specific envelope, measures, evidence, and target. Reject catalogue membership or proficiency labels as transfer proof. |
| Engineered-system lifecycle practice | ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288:2023 supplies a current common framework for life-cycle process descriptions, iterative and concurrent use, stakeholder involvement, and organizational process improvement, while expressly not prescribing one life-cycle model, development methodology, Method, modeling approach, or technique: https://www.iso.org/standard/81702.html. This is a current-standard reference, not evidence that process completion changes one holder’s capability. Applying its full process set would be disproportionate for a narrow CDI case. | Adapt the non-prescription and system-boundary discipline for technical and hybrid holders and the reopen rule in step 8. Reject lifecycle-process conformance, document completion, or a passed stage as capability or transfer evidence; the robotic-cell case still uses its target measures in representative Work. |
Currentness and reopen. Recheck only the affected row when an official edition changes, a newer systematic review overturns a used transfer or intervention conclusion, the receiving domain supplies a better method at comparable effort, or this pattern changes the baseline, target, transfer, or direct-relation rule carried by that row.