1) Theory.
The practitioner must comprehend the purpose and philosophy of the discipline in question.

2) Practice.
The practitioner has had enough opportunities to put theory to the test in a pragmatic manner.

3) Initiation.
The practitioner has extended knowledge of the discipline beyond the basics and appreciates the ramifications of using the first two stages of competence.

4) Expertise.
The practitioner has reached a level of ability where the exceptions to the rule are as readily recognized as those embodying the rule itself.

5) Interaction.
The practitioner is aware that valid progress is not determined by the practitioner alone, but through a valid exchange of information and definition of a shared purpose.

6) Flexibility.
The practitioner is able to adapt the specific knowledge to each unique circumstance presented, and to achieve a satisfactory outcome in terms of the "client's" wishes as well as the practitioner's. Standards are useful, but not when they become dogma.

7) Integration.
Integrated knowledge realized through specifics for individuals in a responsible manner; this is brought about by all people involved reaching as much understanding as is possible, not only of context but of methodology as well. For those that regard themselves as experts, this is the most elusive stage of competence, and is revealed in such phrases as, "I am sure you don't want to get bogged down in technicalities," or "You don't understand the math," or "An explanation would be tedious." When a practitioner retreats into jargon with those unfamiliar with the specialized language, it is a signal that the seventh level of competence is not operative.