Free Assessment · 3 Minutes
Rate your team across 5 dimensions: Communication, Trust, Accountability, Alignment, and Engagement. One question at a time.
The questions cover the conditions that determine whether a team performs, rather than whether the people are individually capable. Google's Project Aristotle, a multi-year internal study of what distinguished its most effective teams, found composition mattered less than how members treated each other — with psychological safety ranking as the strongest single factor.
So the check looks at whether problems surface early, whether disagreement is survivable, whether accountability is real, and whether people know what they are collectively trying to do.
Look at the lowest dimension first. Team dysfunction is rarely evenly distributed, and the weakest condition usually explains the symptoms you are actually seeing. A team that cannot disagree openly will look like a team with an execution problem, because the flawed plan never got challenged.
This is a leader's-eye view, and leaders systematically overestimate psychological safety on their own teams. The cost of telling you the truth rises with your authority, so the more senior you are, the more optimistic this reading is likely to be.
The honest version is to have the team complete it anonymously and compare. Where your answers and theirs diverge is the finding, and it is usually more useful than either score alone.
Speak last. When the most senior person in a discussion states a position first, everything after becomes commentary on that position. It is the highest-leverage change available to most managers and it costs nothing.
After that: building accountability that does not depend on you checking, one-to-ones that are not status updates, and addressing the performance problem everyone can see and nobody names.
Ideally yes, anonymously. A leader-only result reflects one vantage point, and it is the vantage point most insulated from bad news. The gap between your answers and theirs is the most useful output.
Quarterly is enough for most teams, or after a significant change such as a reorganisation, a new manager, or a period of sustained pressure. Team health erodes considerably faster than it builds.
Start with the single lowest dimension rather than launching a broad initiative. Team-building activities do not fix psychological safety or accountability problems — those are changed by what the leader does in ordinary meetings.
No. Engagement surveys measure how people feel about the organization. This measures the working conditions inside one team that determine whether it performs.