Every module in Foundations is independently certifiable. You don't have to complete all 7 to earn a credential. Pick one, do the focused micro-portfolio at the end, submit it, get it peer-reviewed against the published rubric, and walk away with an Open Badges 3.0 micro-credential you can display on LinkedIn.
The lesson certs stack: earn all 7 + pass the final synthesis portfolio, and you've earned the full Adytum Certified · Growth Operator · Foundations credential — the parent cert that subsumes the 7 micro-certs.
The stacking model
7 lesson certs (one per module) + final synthesis portfolio = full Foundations certificate 4 Tier certificates (Foundations → Practitioner → Expert → Master) = full Track Master credential
The 7 lesson certificates
adytum.mk.foundations.domain-theory
Module 1 — Domain Theory · LIVE
What it proves: You can analyze a business's marketing strategy through the canonical theoretical lenses and articulate where it succeeds or fails.
Micro-portfolio (~60 min)
Pick a business you don't own or work for (a real company you have visibility into — your favorite SaaS tool, a brand you buy from, a venture you've considered investing in). Write a 1-page marketing-strategy analysis covering: (a) the Levitt test — what business do they think they're in vs. what need do they actually serve? (b) penetration vs loyalty diagnosis — do they appear to be a small brand fighting double-jeopardy or a large brand defending leadership? (c) a distinctive-asset audit — name 2-3 distinctive brand assets they own (or note their absence), (d) a brand-equity vs activation read — does their visible marketing skew brand or performance, and is that mix appropriate for their stage?
Rubric — 5 dimensions
Levitt test correctly applied — distinguishes the product they sell from the customer need they serve; specific, not generic
Penetration/loyalty diagnosis grounded — uses brand-size and category context, not opinion; correctly identifies the relevant lever
Brand-equity/activation read — observable evidence of their marketing mix; defensible call on appropriateness given stage
Calibrated honesty — no hallucinated claims; everything traces to observable evidence (URLs, ads, public earnings/reports); acknowledges uncertainty where present
Pass = ≥4 of 5 at threshold · 2 peer reviewers + 10% staff QA sample · Fail = 14-day cooldown then retry
adytum.mk.foundations.workflow-design
Module 2 — Workflow Design · LIVE
What it proves: You can take a marketing intent and turn it into a runnable, tool-independent plan — brief, channels, assets, and measurement decided before production.
Micro-portfolio (~75 min)
For a real or chosen business: (a) a complete seven-field campaign brief (objective, audience, proposition, support, channels+budget, timing, measurement), (b) a fully populated nine-cell campaign-planning canvas, and (c) a tool-options matrix for one workflow, including the manual baseline as a scored candidate.
Rubric — 5 dimensions
Brief discipline — single proposition (not three stapled together); measurement field names a specific metric and where it's observed
Audience grounding — audience defined by buying situation/job, with evidence of at least one research workflow (interviews, Mom-Test conversations, or verbatim mining) feeding it
Channel logic — channels classified P/E/S/O with a stated owned-channel conversion path; selection argued from audience presence, not habit
Canvas coherence — the nine cells agree with each other (assets serve the proposition, budget includes founder time honestly, flight plan has an end date)
Tool independence — matrix includes the manual baseline and a portability check; no cell of the plan depends on a specific vendor to make sense
Pass = ≥4 of 5 at threshold · Manual staff review (soft-launch) · Fail = 14-day cooldown then retry
adytum.mk.foundations.process-design
Module 3 — Process Design · LIVE
What it proves: You can design the operating layer of a marketing function — intake, decision rights, cadence, handoffs, and done-ness — so the function is transferable to a first hire.
Micro-portfolio (~75 min)
A one-page marketing operating system for a real or chosen business: (a) intake front door + the four triage lanes with the alignment test stated, (b) a DACI allocation across asset/campaign/strategy decision levels, (c) chosen cadence (sprint, kanban, or hybrid) with an explicit WIP limit, (d) one written handoff contract for the business's weakest border, (e) a definition-of-done checklist for the most-shipped asset type.
Rubric — 5 dimensions
Intake completeness — single front door, all four lanes, and a stated strategic test for triage (not vibes)
DACI integrity — exactly one Driver and one Approver per decision level; allocation matches the org's reality
Cadence fit — chosen rhythm justified for the work mix; WIP limit is a number, not an aspiration
Handoff contract quality — definition + two-way SLA + data returned, one page, for a genuinely recurring failure
DoD enforceability — checks are binary and checkable; includes factual accuracy, functional integrity, and measurement readiness
Pass = ≥4 of 5 at threshold · Manual staff review (soft-launch) · Fail = 14-day cooldown then retry
adytum.mk.foundations.edge-cases
Module 4 — Edge Cases · LIVE
What it proves: You exercise pattern-based judgment under exception — crisis, platform shock, regulated claims — and you know where your escalation lines sit.
Micro-portfolio (~60 min)
An edge-case readiness file for a real or chosen business: (a) the most plausible crisis scenario, classified under SCCT, with a three-sentence holding statement pre-drafted, (b) a channel concentration-risk register (top channel share, failure impact, named mitigations), (c) a regulated-category review of current claims against the detection list, with escalation calls stated.
Holding statement quality — fast-honest-factual; no speculation, no mismatch (no victim language for a preventable scenario)
Concentration math honest — real share estimates, a survivable-loss judgment, and mitigations that are actions, not hopes
Regulated-category vigilance — claims checked against the full detection list; borderline claims flagged rather than rationalized
Escalation lines drawn — for each scenario, what the operator handles alone vs. where counsel/founder/platform enters — stated before the incident, not after
Pass = ≥4 of 5 at threshold · Manual staff review (soft-launch) · Fail = 14-day cooldown then retry
adytum.mk.foundations.stakeholders
Module 5 — Stakeholders · LIVE
What it proves: You can run marketing as a coalition function — interests understood, contracts written, rhythms kept — across sales, product, finance, leadership, partners, and customers.
Micro-portfolio (~60 min)
A stakeholder map for a real or chosen business covering the six borders (sales, product, finance, founder/CEO, external creative, customer success/customers). For each: the stakeholder's interest in one sentence, the written-contract status (exists / missing / broken), and the operating rhythm. Plus one fully drafted handoff fix for the weakest border, in Module 3's contract format.
Rubric — 5 dimensions
Interest statements are interests — what each stakeholder needs to succeed, not what they're "like"; Fisher/Ury applied, not summarized
Honest contract audit — missing and broken contracts admitted; no border marked healthy without evidence
Rhythms are real — each border has a named cadence (or an admission of none); the §5.4 reporting rhythm specified if a founder/CEO border exists
The drafted fix is executable — definition + two-way SLA + data returned, for the genuinely weakest border
Customer as stakeholder — the proof supply chain (testimonials/reviews/referrals) has a named owner and an ask cadence
Pass = ≥4 of 5 at threshold · Manual staff review (soft-launch) · Fail = 14-day cooldown then retry
adytum.mk.foundations.ethics-governance
Module 6 — Ethics & Governance · LIVE
What it proves: You can govern a funnel — substantiation, disclosure, consent, and dark-pattern detection — to the standard a founder can trust with their brand. Required for the full Foundations credential.
Micro-portfolio (~90 min)
A marketing governance review of a real or chosen funnel: (a) a substantiation table for every measurable claim (claim → evidence held → verdict: keep/reword/test), (b) a disclosure audit of every third-party voice (testimonials, reviews, affiliates), (c) a consent inventory of the email list, (d) a dark-pattern walk-through of the funnel against the six-pattern table, with one honest redesign fully specified.
Rubric — 5 dimensions
Claim classification correct — puffery vs measurable distinguished; substantiation evidence is evidence, not belief
Disclosure audit complete — every material connection found and assessed against the 2023 Endorsement Guides' visibility standard
Consent honesty — traceable opt-in fraction stated; a real plan (not a rationalization) for the rest
Dark-pattern detection — the walk-through finds the closest-to-the-line step (every funnel has one); the redesign passes the endorse-after-understanding test without destroying the step's function
Governance is operationalized — at least one finding becomes a DoD line or QA check, not just an observation
Pass = ≥4 of 5 at threshold · Manual staff review (soft-launch) · Fail = 14-day cooldown then retry
adytum.mk.foundations.measurement
Module 7 — Measurement · LIVE
What it proves: You can build measurement that changes decisions — honest unit economics, attribution humility, and Goodhart-resistant targets.
Micro-portfolio (~90 min)
A one-page measurement system for a real or chosen business: (a) the channel verdict table (fully-loaded CAC, payback, trend, verdict per channel), (b) a written UTM taxonomy, (c) one designed (not necessarily run) incrementality test for the most-trusted channel, (d) a Goodhart pre-mortem for the most important target, with its countervailing paired metric named.
Rubric — 5 dimensions
Unit economics honest — CAC fully loaded (including founder time), LTV on gross profit not revenue, payback computed; estimates labeled as estimates
Verdicts are decisions — each channel row ends in scale/test/cut, not "monitor"
Incrementality design sound — what's withheld, for how long, and what total-sales (not channel-attributed) movement changes the decision
Goodhart pre-mortem specific — the gaming described is the cheapest one available; the paired metric would actually catch it
Pass = ≥4 of 5 at threshold · Manual staff review (soft-launch) · Fail = 14-day cooldown then retry
How submission works (today)
Foundations is in soft-launch. Lesson cert submissions are reviewed manually by Adytum staff for the first cohort while the peer-review infrastructure is being built. Submit your micro-portfolio here → Target turnaround is 7 days; pass earns a certificate with a unique ID on the public verification register.
Anti-inflation rules — why these credentials mean something
No attendance certificates. Reading the module does not earn a credential. Only competence-proven work does.
14-day cooldown on retry after a fail. Prevents grinding the same submission until it passes.
Same quality bar as track-level portfolios — peer-graded against this published rubric + Adytum staff QA on a 10% sample of submissions.
Recertification every 3 years at the lesson level. Disciplines drift; credentials shouldn't pretend otherwise.
Public revocation for cause. Lesson certs can be pulled if the holder is found to have misrepresented the work or violated the Adytum Certified Code of Conduct.
Track-level reciprocal value (Plus subscription discount, partner-referral eligibility, listing in the public Adytum Certified directory) unlocks at full Tier completion, not at individual lesson completion.