See what your organization actually values.
A fast diagnostic that uses comparative ranking and observed-behavior prompts to reveal which values people prioritize, which behaviors they notice, and where teams diverge.
Illustrative report preview
Leadership team signals
Sample data only. Administrators receive thresholded group results; participants retain access to their own results.
Meetings end aligned, but commitments remain unclear
Operations vs. commercial leadership
Strong consistency across completed responses
Why leaders use it
Replace vague culture averages with ranked trade-offs.
Values & Behaviors is built for CEOs, COOs, CHROs, HRBPs, and department leaders who need a sharper read on alignment before choosing an action plan.
Agreement scales hide trade-offs
Most teams agree with every positive value. Forced rankings show what people actually choose when priorities compete.
Self-opinion questions distort sensitive topics
Behavior prompts ask what people observe around them, reducing the pressure to give the acceptable answer.
Culture work needs ranked action
Leaders get prioritized statements, divergence signals, and cohort patterns they can act on instead of another average score.
Method in plain English
Designed to reveal priorities, observations, and signal quality.
The survey is short enough for broad participation but structured enough to expose relative priorities and alignment gaps.
Read the full methodRank, don’t rate
Participants order five statements at a time, creating clear relative priorities without agree/disagree inflation.
Observe, don’t posture
Values ask what people prioritize. Behaviors ask what people see happening in the organization.
Check signal quality
Completion, consistency, contradiction, and engagement checks help separate reliable signals from noisy responses.
Two clear modules
Keep values and behaviors separate.
Positive value statements and observed behavior statements answer different questions. The product keeps them distinct so leaders do not blur aspiration with day-to-day operating reality.
What people prioritize
Values module
Positive value statements reveal the principles people put first when every option sounds desirable.
What people observe
Behaviors module
Observed-behavior statements surface decision habits, meeting norms, and trade-offs people experience in practice.
Pilot flow
From statement set to executive report.
A focused pilot can run with one leadership team, one department, or a broader organization cohort.
Choose the module
Run Values, Behaviors, or both as separate diagnostics for a team, function, or organization.
Invite participants
Share an assigned invite link and let each participant complete the configured ranking flow.
Participants rank
Four timed ranking rounds turn instinctive trade-offs into comparable preference data.
Review insights
See ranked statements, cohort alignment, divergent teams, and quality labels in aggregate reports.
Pilot pricing
Start with a focused pilot before scaling.
Pilot pricing is designed for a first team or organization diagnostic, including setup guidance, a standard statement module, and an aggregate report review.
Pilot package
Use the pilot to validate participation, signal quality, and leadership usefulness before broader rollout.
Sample insight preview
See the kind of signal leaders get back.
The preview below is illustrative sample data. It shows the report style, not real organization results.
Illustrative sample data
Executive snapshot
Strongest alignment
Customer impact and ownership ranked consistently across cohorts.
Largest divergence
Decision speed split sharply between senior leaders and operators.
Behavior to address
Teams observe unclear commitments after alignment meetings.
Privacy
Employees need to trust the process.
Trust requires precise claims about own-result access, aggregate reporting, backend suppression, and the invitation details operations teams can still see.
Backend-enforced suppression
Small cohorts and protected result cells are withheld rather than returned with exact analytic counts.
Defined access boundaries
Administrators receive group results; invitation membership and delivery state remain visible only for operations.
Executive-ready
Outputs connect ranked priorities to alignment gaps and next-step conversations.
FAQ
Questions buyers and participants ask
Treat privacy and interpretation as product features, not footnotes.
Backend reporting suppresses small cohorts and individual result cells. This reduces direct small-group disclosure, but it is not a complete anonymity guarantee: repeated filtering can still create differencing risk, and invitation membership and delivery state remain operationally visible.
No. Participants can access their own results, while administrators receive group-level aggregate results rather than another participant’s answers. Invitation identities and delivery state remain visible for operational administration, not as access to individual results.
The survey uses four timed ranking rounds plus instructions and transitions. Actual completion time varies with the configured statement set, device, and participant pace.
No. Values & Behaviors is a focused diagnostic for values alignment, observed behaviors, and cultural trade-offs. It complements engagement surveys by providing ranked priorities and divergence data rather than agreement scores.
The standard library includes 60 statements across values and behaviors categories. Custom statements can receive advisory review, but review does not block their use or guarantee methodological quality. Standard sets remain the safer choice for comparability.
Quality labels summarize completion rates, internal consistency, and contradiction patterns. They tell leaders whether a result represents a strong signal, a directional indicator, or data too weak to act on.
Values statements ask what you prioritize. Behavior statements ask what you observe happening around you. This distinction is intentional—observational prompts reduce self-presentation pressure and surface team-level patterns.
Aggregate reporting requires at least 5 eligible contributors. The backend suppresses smaller cohorts and protected cells rather than returning their exact analytic counts.
Departments can be compared when each selected cohort and required comparison cell meets the reporting threshold. Treat the output as a configured ranking comparison, not proof of intrinsic values or causes.
The backend withholds small cohorts and protected result cells, including exact analytic counts below the threshold. This reduces direct disclosure but does not provide absolute anonymity or prevent every differencing risk from repeated authorized queries.
Next step
Ready to test this with a real team?
Run a focused pilot, compare Values and Behaviors modules, and review aggregate findings with leadership.