AI readiness — team assessment
Your AI strategy is only as real as the work your teams can repeat.
One leadership conversation is a useful hypothesis. A team assessment shows whether it holds across the company—where people are ready, where practice breaks down, and which workflows deserve attention first.
Representative interviews · no workshop · scoped before anything starts
Why the team changes the answer
A leader sees intention. The company report sees practice.
The report cross-checks what people say across roles and departments. It keeps unknowns unknown, makes disagreements visible, and shows where a promising experiment has—or has not— become a working method.
Acme GmbH · 14 perspectives
High attitude, low ability
Built from 14 interview perspectives. Scores describe reported work practices, not tested proficiency.
- Company score
- 64
- Threshold
- 70
Every team, every dimension
A team appears once three people are represented, so nobody is identifiable by elimination. Darker means a stronger reported practice; unknown stays unknown.
| Awareness | Attitude | Adoption | Ability | Ambition | Score | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Organisation14 perspectives | 72 | 73 | 67 | 45 | 61 | 64 |
| Finance3 perspectives | 57 | 65 | 59 | 42 | 47 | 54 |
| LeadershipFewer than 3 perspectives | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Marketing3 perspectives | 80 | 75 | 68 | 42 | 66 | 66 |
| Operations3 perspectives | 43 | 48 | 51 | 22 | 36 | 40 |
| Sales3 perspectives | 90 | 90 | 83 | 61 | 74 | 80 |
A real report component produced by the same readiness scorer used for live assessments. Teams with fewer than three perspectives stay hidden.
What becomes possible
Make the next AI decision with the company, not around it.
Find the alignment gap
See where leadership intent matches daily practice—and where the two tell different stories before a rollout begins.
Compare teams honestly
Understand why one department is building repeatable methods while another is still experimenting in isolation.
Choose work, not tools
Rank the recurring workflows worth improving first, with the context, owners, systems, and guardrails needed to act.
Hear the truth safely
Give people a private way to describe how work really happens. Team reporting stays hidden until enough perspectives protect individuals.
From signal to evidence
Your snapshot starts the conversation. The team view supports the decision.
How it works
Private conversations. One shared picture.
No room full of people trying to agree in real time. Each person speaks privately; the assessment does the cross-checking afterward.
- 01
Scope the decision
We agree what leadership needs to learn and which teams must be represented—before anybody receives an interview link.
- 02
Invite representative voices
Typically a leader plus three perspectives per team: a department lead and people close to the recurring work.
- 03
Let Ida do the listening
Each person has a private 20–25 minute voice conversation in their browser. No workshop, group dynamics, or survey fatigue.
- 04
Decide from the company picture
You receive the team heatmap, alignment gaps, contested findings, and the first workflows worth moving into repeatable practice.
Designed for honest answers
People need to trust the process before you can trust the result.
Private by default
Interviews happen one-to-one, without a manager or workshop audience in the room.
Minimum cohorts
A team row only appears after three perspectives are represented.
Practice, not performance
Scores describe reported working practices—not individual proficiency or employee ranking.
Request a scope
Start with the decision you need to make.
Tell us which part of the company you want to understand. We’ll propose a representative scope before any interviews are sent.
- No account or payment required to request a scope
- No participant is contacted until you approve the plan
- Prefer a conversation first? Choose a time directly
Request a team assessment
We’ll use this to prepare the first scope—not to launch or bill anything.
Questions
What leaders usually ask first.
Does everyone in the company need to participate?
No. The goal is a representative evidence base, not a company-wide survey. A typical scope includes leadership and at least three perspectives from each team that should appear in the report.
Will leaders see what an individual said?
The report is designed around team patterns, not individual performance. A team row is held back until three people are represented, and the assessment can use anonymous attribution.
How is this different from an employee survey?
Ida asks for recent examples of real work, follows useful threads, and cross-checks accounts across roles. The result shows evidence, disagreements, unknowns, and workflows—not an average sentiment score.
How long does it take?
Each participant needs about 20–25 minutes. Interviews happen privately whenever convenient, so there is no workshop to coordinate across the whole company.
What happens after we request one?
We review your intended scope and decision, then agree the teams and representative roles to include. Nothing is charged or launched from this request form.