The review cadence

A forest is a living map, and living things need tending. The method runs on two nested rhythms — one for people, one for the forest itself — plus one hard deadline.

Individual progress: roughly monthly. A short catch-up per person keeps their levels accurate. Note the word short — this is a check-in, not a ceremony. And nobody is expected to advance every month; most months the honest update is "still working on the same three skills," which is exactly what well-cut skills look like mid-growth (remember: one level takes a month to three). The monthly rhythm fits fast-moving roles especially well — paired with the career progress and opportunities that justify asking more of people.

The forest itself: every six months. Fields move. Twice a year, review the forest — the next page covers what actually changes. With fast-moving fields the changes needn't be large, but they need to happen; a review that changes nothing is still a review that confirmed the map.

One year is the hard maximum. Past a year without a forest review, the map drifts from reality — skills that no longer matter, missing skills everyone now needs, ranks that describe last year's expectations. And people notice. The moment a team senses the forest doesn't match their real work, they stop trusting it, and a map nobody trusts is worse than no map. Owning this cadence is the job, not an afterthought.

The two rhythms feed each other: monthly check-ins surface the small signals ("three people said this skill feels outdated") that the six-month review acts on.

[Graphic — description for designer] A circular calendar diagram: an outer ring of 12 small leaf icons (monthly individual check-ins), an inner ring with 2 larger tree icons at opposite points (six-month forest reviews), and a subtle red-tinted marker at the 12-month point labeled "hard maximum." Flat style, forest green rings on linen background, minimal labels.