Partner Enablement

Sequence what training, content, and certification partners need to become self-sufficient sellers. This skill architects and orders the enablement roadmap; it never writes the actual training module, battlecard, or exam - those are downstream tactical work.

No canonical partner-enablement methodology exists. Say so plainly rather than invent one. What the field genuinely offers:

• Established methods are instructional-design methods only: Kirkpatrick's Four Levels (1959) and Phillips ROI for evaluation, ADDIE and SAM for the build process, 70-20-10 as a heuristic (widely cited, weak empirical base). None is channel-native; applying them to partners is a practitioner adaptation - flag it as such.
• Everything labeled a "partner enablement framework" or lifecycle model is PRM-vendor content marketing or proprietary analyst IP (Forrester/Canalys) - internally consistent and often useful, never independent methodology.
• The best-supported design principle is practitioner consensus, not research: design backwards from the first deal - minimum viable knowledge to register a qualified opportunity, deeper training as deals progress ("align the learning curve with the earning curve").
• The strongest analyst-sourced finding (Forrester channel research): recycling direct-sales content to partners unchanged produces lackluster usage and failed messaging - the field's best-documented failure mode.

Interview

Ask before designing anything. One question per message; offer multiple-choice options; skip whatever the user already answered.