The standard for business operations practice
This document defines what NBOP-CP assesses. It is published in full, before certification opens, so that it can be argued with.
Most bodies of knowledge are sold rather than published. That makes them impossible to evaluate before purchase and impossible to hold to account afterwards. NBOP publishes the standard openly and maintains a changelog, so that any claim about currency can be checked rather than taken on trust.
This is a draft. It is expected to change materially before the first version is ratified.
Scope
The standard covers the work of running a business, as distinct from running a project, a supply chain, a quality system, or a people function. Those are served by existing bodies and NBOP does not duplicate them.
It is scoped to the operator who is accountable for how an organization actually functions day to day: the systems, the measurement, the cadence, and the capacity that determine whether a business can grow without breaking.
Domains
The standard is organized into eight domains. Weighting is not yet set and will be determined by a job task analysis rather than by editorial preference. Practitioners rate each task on criticality and on frequency against fixed intervals, and the domain weights are derived from those paired ratings. The full method and the results, including any finding that contradicts this draft, will be published here.
The analysis is open now. The domains below are a draft written from practice and from the gaps left by adjacent bodies. They are not yet evidence. Each one now has its own page explaining what it is and how it fails. None of those pages states a weight, because no weight has been set.
Domains in the draft standard, published in full and free to read.
Not yet ratified. The weighting is being set by a job task analysis, in the open.
Revision cycle, with version end of life dates published in advance.
Permanently. Everything an assessment covers is readable without paying anything.
Process architecture
Identifying, documenting, and maintaining the processes an organization depends on. Judging which processes warrant documentation and which do not. Keeping documentation current as practice changes.
Measurement and reporting
Selecting measures that reflect the health of the operation rather than the convenience of the reporter. Building reporting that changes decisions. Distinguishing leading from lagging indicators in a live business.
Operating cadence
The meeting, review, and planning rhythm that keeps an organization aligned. Designing cadence proportionate to the size and volatility of the business rather than importing a framework wholesale.
Capacity and resourcing
Understanding where the constraint sits, forecasting demand against capability, and sequencing work so the constraint moves deliberately rather than by accident.
Role design and accountability
Defining who owns what, in a way that survives growth and turnover. Recognizing when a role has become two roles, and when an organizational chart has stopped describing reality.
Financial operations
The operational side of money: the cadence of forecasting and review, unit economics as an operating instrument, and the relationship between operational decisions and margin. This is not accounting and does not overlap with it.
Systems and tooling
Selecting, implementing, and retiring the tools an operation runs on. Judging integration cost honestly. Recognizing when a tooling problem is actually a process problem.
Change and adoption
Getting other people to actually work differently. The domain where most operational initiatives fail, and the one most often omitted from operations training entirely.
Assessment principles
- The standard is public; the assessment is not. Publishing what is assessed does not weaken the credential, because what is scarce is passing, not knowing what will be asked.
- Candidacy requires documented prior experience. The credential validates practice that already exists. It is not an entry route into the field.
- Assessment samples the work, not traits. Items are drawn from observable work behaviors and the products those behaviors produce. NBOP does not assess general judgment, leadership or aptitude as such, because a credential built on those constructs cannot be defended as job related.
- Assessment includes constructed response, not only selection. Some operational work behaviors cannot be sampled by multiple choice.
- Assessment is accessible. Reasonable accommodations are available to candidates with disabilities, on request, at no additional cost, under a published process.
- The pass mark and the pass rate are both published. A body that certifies everyone who applies is not certifying anything.
- Results are scored, not binary. A comparable score is more useful to the holder and to anyone relying on the credential than a pass or fail.
- Assessment is independent of any preparation provider. No candidate is required to purchase preparation from NBOP or from any party connected to it.
Revision policy
The standard carries a version number and a date. Changes are recorded in the changelog below, including what changed and why. Superseded versions are archived rather than deleted, and end-of-life dates are published in advance rather than applied retroactively.
The revision cadence will be stated here once the first version is ratified. It will be a commitment with dates attached, not a claim that the material is kept current.
Changelog
- Version 0.9 · Draft · 19 August 2026
- Renumbered from 0.1. The text is unchanged: same scope, same eight domains, same assessment principles. The number moved because 0.1 understated where the standard actually is, and because it disagreed with the eligibility criteria served by the API, which have carried 0.9 since publication. What still separates this from 1.0 is the domain weighting, which is set by the job task analysis rather than by editorial choice. End of life unchanged at 17 February 2027.
- Version 0.1 · Draft · 17 August 2026
- Initial publication of scope, eight domains, and assessment principles. Domain weighting not yet set. Open for comment. End of life 17 February 2027.
Comment on this draft. The standard is being written in the open specifically so that practitioners can push back on it before it is ratified. If you hold operational responsibility and think a domain is wrong, missing, or misweighted, that is the input worth having.
Check whether your experience qualifies and add your name.
The weighting is not settled yet
And the standard says so, rather than implying otherwise.
The relative weight of each domain is being set by a job task analysis of practicing operators. Until it closes, the standard states equal provisional weighting in the open. You can answer it, or you can check the criteria against yourself.