Context : Developing high-quality software requires skilled software professionals equipped with a set of basic and essential software engineering competencies (SEC). These competencies and the satisfaction levels derived from them change over a project's lifecycle, or as software professionals move from one project to another. Objective : Previous studies suggest a lack of means enabling SEC stakeholders to identify and assess competencies suitable for different projects. Additionally, previous research has mainly portrayed SEC to be static and overlooked their evolution over time and across projects. We investigate how we could effectively identify and match the competencies of software professionals necessary for different projects. Method : We follow a mixed-method approach to iteratively develop and evaluate a framework for identifying and managing SEC. In so doing, we use the results of an extensive literature review, focus group discussions with experts from academia and industry, and data collected through interviews with 138 individuals with a supervisory role in the software industry. Results : Drawing on the Kano model and Competency Framework for Software Engineers, we propose a Unified Competence Gate for Software Professionals (UComGSP), a framework for identifying and managing SEC. The UComGSP consists of 62 hard competencies, 63 soft competencies, and 25 essential SEC competencies. Additionally, we propose three stakeholders’ satisfaction levels for SEC assessment: basic, performance, and delighter. Furthermore, based on empirical observation, we report 27 competencies not mentioned in the reviewed literature; 11 of them are considered essential competencies. Conclusion : Competence development involves different stakeholders, including software professionals, educators, and the software industry. The UComGSP framework enables SEC stakeholders to (i) identify SE competencies, (ii) identify the essential SEC, and (iii) assess the satisfaction levels that can be derived from different competencies. Future research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed framework across software development projects.Peer reviewe
