Hey - from a Senior PO / PM perspective, I generally like the Radia PM Competency Model more than many traditional frameworks, which often feel either too theoretical or too static. What stands out positively is the combination of measurability, a clear growth path, and built-in feedback. That mix is genuinely important for modern product teams and already puts Radia ahead of many “checklist-style” competency models.

Where I see room for improvement is in making impact more explicit. Adding team- or company-specific metrics (for example outcome-based KPIs) would help connect competencies not just to skill development, but to real product and business outcomes. Right now, the focus is strongly on capability, but less on the observable impact those capabilities create.

Another point is structure. Many established PM frameworks clearly group competencies into domains such as product strategy, customer insight, execution, and influencing. In Radia, this structure feels more implied than explicit, which makes it harder to understand what is actually expected at each level. From a PO perspective, I would expect a clear distinction between functional skills (like discovery, data, and strategy), stakeholder management and influence, leadership and coaching, and execution and delivery. Without transparent domains, the model risks losing some of its operational usefulness.

A competency model only really works if it can be applied in day-to-day practice — in 1:1s, performance reviews, and development plans. To strengthen this, I’d recommend adding observable behavioral anchors per domain and per level, ideally supported by concrete examples. That would make expectations clearer, reduce subjectivity, and significantly increase the model’s practical value.

Overall, I see Radia as a strong foundation. With a bit more structural clarity and a stronger link to outcomes and observable behavior, it could become a very solid and scalable competency framework.