© (Copyright), International Software Architecture Qualification Board e. V. (iSAQB® e. V.) 2026

The curriculum may only be used subject to the following conditions:

  1. You wish to obtain the CPSA Certified Professional for Software Architecture Foundation Level® certificate or the CPSA Certified Professional for Software Architecture Advanced Level® certificate. For the purpose of obtaining the certificate, it shall be permitted to use these text documents and/or curricula by creating working copies for your own computer. If any other use of documents and/or curricula is intended, for instance for their dissemination to third parties, for advertising etc., please write to info@isaqb.org to enquire whether this is permitted. A separate license agreement would then have to be entered into.

  2. If you are a trainer or training provider, it shall be possible for you to use the documents and/or curricula once you have obtained a usage license. Please address any enquiries to info@isaqb.org. License agreements with comprehensive provisions for all aspects exist.

  3. If you fall neither into category 1 nor category 2, but would like to use these documents and/or curricula nonetheless, please also contact the iSAQB e. V. by writing to info@isaqb.org. You will then be informed about the possibility of acquiring relevant licenses through existing license agreements, allowing you to obtain your desired usage authorizations.

Important Notice

We stress that, as a matter of principle, this curriculum is protected by copyright. The International Software Architecture Qualification Board e. V. (iSAQB® e. V.) has exclusive entitlement to these copyrights.

The abbreviation "e. V." is part of the iSAQB’s official name and stands for "eingetragener Verein" (registered association), which describes its status as a legal entity according to German law. For the purpose of simplicity, iSAQB e. V. shall hereafter be referred to as iSAQB without the use of said abbreviation.

1. Definitions

1.1. Involved Parties

People involved in the examination process

Name of the role Description, position, task

Candidate

Advanced Level architect aiming for the Expert Level certificate.

iSAQB

The International Standard for Training and Certification in software architecture. The iSAQB accredits certifying bodies and training providers.

iSAQB Expert Level Working Group

Working group of the iSAQB that develops and maintains the Expert Level.

Examiner

Examiners approve the roadmap, evaluate the results, and conduct the individual assessment interviews. They are appointed by the Expert Level Working Group and work on behalf of certifying bodies.

Examinee

An individual who is going through the certification process.

Topic working group

Working group formed to work together on an Expert Level topic.

Topic worker

Individual who works on a topic alone.

Person submitting a topic

Submits a possible topic to be worked on within the scope of an Expert Level certification.

Topic administrator

The topic administrator checks new topics and manages the topic list. A topic moderator must be an active member of the iSAQB.

Training provider

Training providers are "training facilitators" accredited by the iSAQB who appoint the topic moderator.

Certifying body

Certifying bodies are institutions accredited by the iSAQB. They organize the entire examination process and issue the certificate.

2. Overview

2.1. Purpose and Intent

At the CPSA Expert Level (CPSA-E), you will apply the knowledge you’ve gained at the Foundation and Advanced Levels, along with your experience, to work on a specific topic. Through dialogue with other experts, your knowledge will deepen, you will discover new connections, and you will become an expert in a specialized area of software architecture.

By publishing your results, you actively contribute to the wider dissemination of expert knowledge and help improve the quality of software architectures in other organizations as well.

Objectives:

  • You demonstrate that you are an expert in a specialist field of software architecture.

  • You develop new knowledge with other experts.

  • You demonstrate the ability to work in a team.

  • You interact with other experts, thus building a professional network for your future.

  • You present the results at conferences or publish them in professional journals.

2.2. Preconditions

The CPSA Expert Level (CPSA-E) is the highest qualification level awarded by the iSAQB. It targets highly skilled and experienced software architects. Applicants must meet demanding requirements: long-term experience, a clear area of expertise, the ability to develop innovative approaches and solutions, and active contributions to the professional community.

Applicants must have successfully obtained the iSAQB Advanced Level certification. There is no minimum time requirement between obtaining the Advanced Level and Expert Level certifications.

The topic of the Expert Level certification must align with the specialization the applicant selected as part of the Advanced Level certification.

Applicants must have many years of project experience in software architecture and in-depth knowledge of the chosen topic.

2.3. Examination Duration

The topic worker or a topic working group has 12 months from the confirmation of the roadmap by the examiners to submit the results to a certifying body for the first time. A period of between 3 and 9 months is recommended.

With valid justification, the topic working group can extend the period on a monthly basis. The justification must be submitted to and approved by the certifying body.

2.4. Costs

Certification costs are billed separately by the certifying body and the training providers for each service. This ensures topic workers can attend seminars from different training providers. Applicants who fail to finish the certification process will only be charged for services that have already been rendered.

The following list shows which services are billed:

  • Certifying body:

    • Verification of the prerequisites

    • Improvement and acceptance of the roadmap

    • Review of the results

    • Individual certification interview

    • Issuance of the certificate

  • Training providers:

    • Participation in seminars (at least 2)

3. Procedure

3.1. Submit Topic (optional)

The submission of a topic takes place on the iSAQB website via a form. The topic administrator assesses the submitted topic formally and in terms of content within one month. On acceptance, they approve the topic. The topic is then available for application on the iSAQB website. If a topic is rejected, it can be improved and submitted to the topic administrator again.

Criteria for a New Topic

A new topic must satisfy the following criteria:

Criterion Requirement Description

Originality

Must

Can new insights be gained that are not yet widely known in the field of software architecture?

Has the topic not yet been completely and publicly addressed (e.g., on Wikipedia)?

Relevance

Must

Is the topic of interest to a larger group of people?

Innovation

Must

Does the topic generate new ideas and knowledge of general interest?

Creativity

Shall

Does the topic demonstrate creativity, e.g., through synergies, analogies, or ideas?

Effectiveness

Shall

Can working on the topic simplify or accelerate future work in software architecture?

Problem solving

Must

Can working on the topic solve recurring and seemingly insurmountable problems in software architecture?

Examples include:

  • Improve communication between management and software architects

  • Introduction of new methods, such as architecture management, Domain-Driven Design, Green IT, …​

3.2. Step 1: Application for a Topic

The iSAQB publishes the list of available topics, accredited certifying bodies and training providers.

Candidates may apply to a certifying body for a topic.

The certifying body verifies the minimum requirements for participation in the CPSA-E.

Criteria for New Applicants

To be eligible to participate in a topic group, applicants must satisfy the following criteria:

Knowledge and Practical Experience

Applicants justify their suitability for the topic by summarizing their knowledge and practical experience and submitting certificates.

Criterion Description

Advanced Level Certifications

Applicants must confirm that they have the Expert Level certification.

The topic of the Expert Level certification must align with the specialization the applicant selected as part of the Advanced Level certification.

Practical Experience

Applicants can demonstrate at least 7 years of professional experience in the role of software architect within complex software projects. In particular, experience in architectural work that spans systems, domains, or organizational boundaries is required.

Knowledge

A solid understanding and practical application of the core concepts of software architecture, as outlined in the iSAQB curricula for the Foundation and selected Advanced Level topics. Specialization typically takes place in specific focus areas such as Domain-Driven Design, cloud architecture, architecture evaluation, documentation, or modernization, depending on the individual’s expertise and project context.

Knowledge Transfer and Community Contribution

Proof of knowledge transfer or community contribution, such as training and mentoring less experienced developers or architects, leading architecture or development teams, co-developing in open-source projects, as well as through publications or presentations.

Communication Skills

Applicants must be able to communicate complex matters clearly and understandably.
Organization and General Conditions
Criterion Description

iSAQB® can publish results

Applicants must agree that iSAQB® is allowed to publish and exploit the results of the topic group.

Willingness to travel

Applicants must confirm that they are willing to travel at their own expense to work together in the topic group. Topic working groups determine for themselves how to organize their work and whether to meet in person.

Disclosure of contact data

The applicants grant permission to iSAQB® to forward the following contact details to the other members of the topic groups: first name, last name, e-mail address, and phone number.
Why Are These Requirements Important?

The CPSA Expert Level validates technical expertise and recognizes the ability to serve as a thought leader and expert within the software architecture community. Applicants must demonstrate their capacity to contribute to the evolution of the profession, going beyond architectural practice, and show that they can tackle complex challenges in dynamic and demanding environments.

The following criteria may come into operation in the future

iSAQB® may accept individuals as candidates for the Expert Level if they meet one of the following requirement:

  • People who are distinguished experts on the topic.

  • Members of iSAQB® who are not permitted to participate in the iSAQB® Advanced Level Certification since they know the examination question.

The iSAQB® strategy council and the members of the iSAQB® working group "Expert Level" make a majority decision on whether a person meets one of the stated requirements.

iSAQB® can actively invite luminaries to participate in a topic group and refund the cost.

The experts must work in the chosen topic group as well. Nobody gets a certification without active and successful work on a topic.

3.3. Step 2: Assemble Topic Working Group (optional)

This step is only necessary if an applicant wants to develop a topic not individually but as part of a topic working group.

The certifying body ensures that there are sufficient candidates in the topic working group.

Candidates are encouraged to promote the topic among colleagues and acquaintances. The iSAQB will also regularly draw attention to open topics and encourage participation.

As soon as enough candidates for the topic working group are available, the certifying body will inform the candidates about the start of the topic working group and send all the members` contact details to the topic working group.

3.4. Step 3: Contract Certifying Body

Each applicant concludes a contract with a certifying body.

3.5. Step 4: Create Roadmap

The topic worker or topic working group must create a roadmap outlining their plan, including both the content and timelines.

Criteria for a Roadmap

Criterion Requirement Description

Objective, mission

Essential

  • Are the objective and mission of the topic working group described comprehensibly?

Topic working group

Essential

  • Only for topic working groups: Are the contact details of all members of the topic working group stated?

Procedure

Essential

  • Are the roles and tasks of the members of the topic working group described?

  • Is a timetable with milestones provided?

  • Are the times and locations for the optional in-person meetings stated?

  • Are the times and resources for the virtual meetings stated?

  • Are the tools for electronic communication listed?

  • Are work packages and responsibilities defined?

  • Is the review process determined?

Literature

Essential

  • Is there a bibliography?

  • Does the bibliography comprise at least 7 sources?

  • Are the sources of academic value?

Results

Essential

  • Is the mandatory article discussed?

  • Is at least one additional result stated (e.g., instructions, example, …​)?

  • Are the form and structure discussed for each result?

  • Is there an attempt to present the results at at least one conference?

  • Is there an attempt to publish the results in at least one trade publication?

The topic worker or the topic working group submits the roadmap to the certifying body, which forwards it to the examiner. The examiners verify whether the deliverables described in the roadmap are clearly and sufficiently defined and measurable. If necessary, the examiner may request additions to the roadmap.

If the examiners are not satisfied with the roadmap, the topic worker or topic working group revise the roadmap once.

The topic worker or topic working group may only begin work after the examiners have approved the roadmap.

3.6. Step 5: Develop Topic

Working on the Roadmap

The topic worker or the topic working group implements the work packages described in the roadmap. The necessary tasks include data collection, literature reviews, and writing reports.

In group work, participants consolidate and discuss their experiences and draw conclusions from them.

Participation in Seminars

Topic worker and topic working groups must participate in at least two seminars, at least one of which must be relevant to their topic area.

The seminars are conducted by iSAQB-accredited training providers.

Up to eight participants may take part in a seminar covering up to four different topics. Each topic takes a minimum of two hours and a maximum of one day.

Topic worker and topic working groups may book the seminars at different training providers.

Seminars can be held online or in person.

Each seminar must include participants from different topic workers or topic working groups to promote mutual exchange.

During the seminar, the topic worker and topic working groups present their (interim) results, provide each other with feedback, and receive tips from the seminar leader.

Training providers can have the seminars led by leading experts and actively promote this feature.

Training providers are encouraged to also impart knowledge about the field to seminar participants. The training providers decide what the format and scope will be.

Training providers can set the price of a seminar themselves.

Publication of Results

Topic workers and topic working groups are encouraged to publish their results at conferences or in journals. Submissions should be made as part of the topic development process.

The iSAQB will support and promote these publications.

Proof of Activity

The topic workers and topic working groups must store their work results in a version-controlled system (e.g., Git, Wiki), and examiners must be granted access to them. This allows examiners to verify that the topics were actually developed by the topic workers and not by artificial intelligence.

To enable examiners to determine that the development of the topic was not trivial and that each member contributed to approximately the same extent, the activities must be documented. The following criteria apply:

Criteria for Participation

Criterion Required Description

Time Tracking

Required

Topic worker and all members of a topic working group must record their activities in a central list accessible to everyone, documenting at least the following information for each activity:

  • Date and duration

  • Activity

  • Work output

  • Names of the members who participated in the activity.

Total Work Time

Required

A topic worker and each memberof a topic working group must have worked at least 40 hours on the topic.

The following criteria also apply to topic working groups:

Criterion Required Description

Validation

Required

During joint meetings, the members of a topic working group review the plausibility of their colleagues' recorded activities.

Deviation from the Group Average

Required

An average indicates how many hours, on average, each member of the topic working group has contributed. Each member must have contributed at least 60% of the group average.

Different Types of Activities

Required

A member may count only up to 20% of their hours toward organizational activities.

Three Types of Activities

Required

Each member must have performed at least three different types of activities, including:

  • Organization

  • Research

  • Prepare results

    • Prepare a presentation

    • Prepare an article for a professional journal

    • Prepare a conference paper

    • Give a presentation at a conference

Travel time does not count

Required

Travel time does not count as an activity.

Usage of Artificial Intelligence

If generative AI models are used, all communication with the generative AI model must be archived and attached to the results as an annex.

Text passages generated with generative AI models must be identified as such.

4. Certification

4.1. Overview

The certification process consists of the following steps:

  1. The topic worker or topic working group verifies that the roadmap’s objectives have been achieved and that the results meet the formal criteria.

  2. The topic worker or topic working group submits the results to the certifying body, which checks them for compliance with the formal criteria.

  3. Two examiners evaluate the results based on the content criteria. The topic worker or topic working group may improve the results once. The topic worker or the members of the topic working group can participate in the individual examination interview if the examiners evaluate the results positively.

  4. Two examiners conduct an individual examination interview. Since certificates are issued individually, the outcome of certification for members of topic working groups depends solely on the individual examination interview.

  5. The certifying body issues the certificates.

The entire certification process must be completed within six weeks, excluding rework and appeals.

The following sections provide a more thorough description of the steps.

4.2. Formal Check

The topic worker or topic working group ensures that the roadmap’s objectives have been met and that the results meet the formal criteria.

The results can then be submitted to the certifying body, which also reviews them against the following formal criteria:

Formal Criteria for Results

Result Requirement Criterion

All

Essential

Origin of Content:

  • Was the content written independently?

  • Were all sources and tools used fully cited?

Artificial Intelligence

  • Were sections generated using generative artificial intelligence marked?

  • Was the interaction with the artificial intelligence archived and included with the results?

Article

Essential

Does the article have the following structure and content?

  1. Title

    1. Does the title suit the topic discussed?

  2. Authors

    1. Are the authors named?

    2. Are the authors' e-mail addresses listed?

  3. Abstract

    1. Is the problem described briefly?

    2. Does the abstract describe the main theses or results?

    3. Is the description short and understandable?

  4. Introduction

    1. Does the introduction describe the current state of knowledge?

    2. Is the motivation discussed?

    3. Is there a description of the existing knowledge gaps that are to be filled by this academic article?

    4. Is there a description of the research questions that are to be answered in the article?

  1. Main section (chapter name(s) can be chosen freely)

    1. Materials and methods

      1. Is there a description of the information sources?

      2. Is there a description of the methods used to answer the research question?

    2. Results

      1. Is there a description of the findings?

      2. Are the findings substantiated with sufficient plausible data?

    3. Discussion

      1. Is there a description of how the findings are interpreted?

      2. Is there a discussion of questions that arise from the results?

      3. Is there a discussion of the impacts that the findings have in practice?

  2. Summary

    1. Is there a brief summary of all the research questions and their answers?

    2. Is there a brief discussion of the effects of the findings?

  3. Acknowledgments

    1. Are supporters mentioned?

  4. Conflicts of interest

    1. Are conflicts of interest mentioned?

  5. Bibliography

    1. Is there a list of all the literature used?

    2. Is the literature cited correctly?

Additional result

Essential

  • Do the form and content fulfill the purpose of the result (e.g., a new pattern according to the pattern language context, problem, solution)?

  • Is there a comprehensible description of the result?

  • Is it evident that at least two person weeks were necessary for the creation of the additional result?

Submissions

Desired

  • Has the topic working group submitted a talk or a workshop to at least one conference?

  • Has the topic working group attempted to publish the results in at least one trade publication?

Versioned results

Essential

The results must be submitted with a version history so that the examiners can verify that the results were actually developed by the topic workers and not generated by artificial intelligence.

Experience report

Essential

  • Has each member of the topic working group submitted an experience report?

  • Are all the points in the experience report completed?

After the examiner approves the results, the topic working group may submit them to the certifying body.

The certifying body only admits to certification those members who have fulfilled the criteria for participation. If a member fails to meet the criteria, the certifying body will not reimburse them.

4.3. Content Assessment

Assessment by Two Examiners

The certifying body appoints two examiners to assess the content of the results. The examiners use the following content criteria to assess the results.

Content Criteria for Results

Criterion Assessment Scheme

Importance for theory and practice

10 - Outstanding importance
08 - Important
06 - Not unimportant
04 - Rather weak importance
02 - Of low importance
00 - Absolutely no relevance

Originality and degree of innovation

10 - An important and meaningful contribution to the topic area
08 - A clear contribution to the topic area.
06 - A small contribution to the topic area. Added value may result from it in the future.
04 - There is better work on this topic.
02 - Already said many times.
00 - Contributes little or nothing at all to the topic area.

Quality of the presentation

10 - Excellently written
08 - Well written
06 - Readable
04 - Should be edited
02 - Still significant work required
00 - Unacceptable

A minimum of 20 out of 30 points must be achieved. At least 4 out of 10 points must be achieved in each category. The examiners can provide justification for each criterion.

One-Time Retry

If the examiners find that the results do not meet the criteria, the topic worker or topic working group can improve the results once and submit them again to the certifying body. The certifying body is free to charge for the extra effort.

4.4. Oral Exam

If the examiners positively assess the results, they invite the topic worker or each member of the topic working group to an individual oral exam (interview). The oral exam lasts between 30 and 60 minutes and may be conducted online.

The examinee must defend the results and demonstrate sufficient understanding of the topic.

The following table lists the schedule and criteria used by the examiners for evaluation:

Criteria for Oral Exam

Point on Agenda Duration Criteria

1) The examinee presents the topic with self-created resources.

10-20 min

  • Results and findings conclusively summarized

  • Recognizable common thread, expediency, and consistency of the steps

  • Appropriate use of resources (charts, diagrams, models, …​)

  • Presentation style (language and expression)

  • Illustrations are legible and understandable

2) The examiners ask about the content of the results.

10-20 min

  • Ability to explain and clarify the content

  • Answering at least three open questions

  • Complexity and depth of answers

  • Questions answered comprehensively and presented in a clear and logical manner.

3) The examiners test whether the candidate has understood the content, knows the background, and understands the context.

10-20 min

  • Present their opinion well and comprehensibly in the discussion.

  • Statement on the criticism of the results of the topic working group.

4.5. Certificate

Issuing

The certifying body informs the examinees about the results of the certification. The following criteria must be satisfied to receive the certificate:

  • The examiners have assessed the results (of the topic working group) as positive.

  • The examiners assessed the oral exam as positive.

The certificate is issued for the selected specialization and the topic. The holder may refer to themselves as an iSAQB-certified expert in the field.

Individuals can obtain multiple Expert Level certifications.

The Expert Level certification has no expiration date.

Objection

An examinee may object to the assessment within four weeks. The objection must be submitted in writing to the certifying body.

The certifying body selects two new examiners. The certifying body provides the new examiners with access to the assessment protocols and topic working group outcomes.

The new examiners confirm the assessment or issue a new one. The result of the objection procedure is final.

If the examiners issue a new assessment, the examinee may apply for a new oral exam for a fee of €1,500 plus VAT.