Founder Competence Self Assessment

---
name: founder-competence-self-assessment
description: "Work through a structured 10-area / 76-item self-assessment (AFCA) of a founder's or team's readiness for an academic spin-out or research-based startup."
---

# Founder Competence Self-Assessment (AFCA)

## Purpose

Work through a structured 10-area / 76-item self-assessment (AFCA) of a
founder's or team's readiness for an academic spin-out or research-based
startup.

## Based on

the owner's published commercialisation guide (owner, 2025). The AFCA
self-assessment tool (the owner's own). Full data:
`../../references/afca-framework.md`.

- A synthesis of the EU's EntreComp and ResearchComp frameworks and
  peer-reviewed research on commercialisation competence
- 10 areas, 76 items, a 1-7 scale, weighted average normalised to 0-100%

## Method

1. Work through all 10 areas in order (full item list:
   `../../references/afca-framework.md`): Opportunity Orientation, Market &
   Customers, Financial Planning & Management, IP & Evidence, Venture
   Building, Partnerships & Networks, Communication & Influence, Execution &
   Roadmap, Regulatory & Quality, Founder Mindset & Teaming.
2. Score each item on a 1-7 scale honestly — avoid over- or
   under-estimating; if useful, have another team member score in parallel.
3. Calculate the weighted average per area and normalise to 0-100%:
   (raw score - 1)/6*100.
4. Place each area at a level: Foundational (<25%), Intermediate (≥25%),
   Advanced (≥50%), Expert (≥75%).
5. Calculate the overall score as the average of the area averages.
6. Identify the 2-3 weakest areas — these are the most likely stumbling
   blocks. Plan a concrete action for each (e.g. a low IP & Evidence score →
   work through `ip-disclosure-and-ownership-check`).
7. Repeat the assessment every 3-6 months to track progress — this is a
   development tool, not a one-time verdict.

## Gotchas

- Self-scoring bias is the failure mode the Method names directly (step
  2): over- or under-estimating on the 1-7 scale is likely with a single
  scorer, but the output (a normalised percentage) can look precise enough
  to mask that unreliability. Have a second team member score in parallel
  when possible.
- The normalisation formula is (raw score - 1)/6*100, not raw/7*100 — using
  the wrong denominator shifts an area's placement across a maturity
  boundary (e.g., Foundational vs. Intermediate) near the edges of the
  scale.
- The overall score is an average of area averages, not a minimum, so a
  strong overall percentage can hide one critically weak area (e.g., IP &
  Evidence). Step 6 requires looking at the 2-3 weakest areas separately —
  the topline number alone isn't enough to plan action from.
- Treating this as a one-off test defeats its purpose: the Method calls
  for repeating every "3-6 months" specifically so progress on prior
  action items can be checked. A single snapshot can't show whether a
  weak-area action plan actually worked.
- This tool is explicitly not psychometrically validated (see "What this
  skill does NOT do") — presenting its 0-100% output as a certified
  competency score (e.g. in an investor deck) overstates its rigor beyond
  what the framework supports.

## What this skill does NOT do

- Is not a psychometrically validated clinical test — a self-assessment
  whose reliability depends on honesty.
- Does not make a hiring or investment decision for you.
- Does not replace the other skills in this pack for a deep dive into a
  given area — it acts as a map that points to the right skill.

## Continue from here

- Based on the score, go back to the relevant skill: low Market & Customers →
  `research-opportunity-recognition`; low Venture Building →
  `founding-team-design-and-agreements`; low IP & Evidence →
  `ip-disclosure-and-ownership-check`; low Execution & Roadmap →
  `commercialisation-journey-roadmap`.
- Pack's shared guardrails: `../../CLAUDE.md`
- Overview of the full journey: `../commercialisation-journey-roadmap/SKILL.md`

## References

- `../../references/case-studies.md` — 7 spin-out examples from different
  industries and regions
- `../../references/terminology.md` — the handbook's glossary
- `../../references/sources.md` — the handbook's own source references
- `../../CLAUDE.md` — the pack's shared guardrails