For managers of product teams
Understand the product team you actually have.
See each product manager’s demonstrated strengths, readiness, and coaching priorities using one consistent, evidence-based assessment.
Choose your scope
Assess your team, or assess yourself
Both use the same competency framework and evidence standard, and adaptive interviews may follow different question paths. The team view adds a shared picture across everyone who completes one, and every person still keeps their own report.
For your team
Team Assessment
Invite up to 8 people, no credit card
Everyone you invite keeps their own report. You get a team competency heatmap, the gaps you share, who is ready for the next level, and one-on-one agendas built from the same evidence.
For you
Full Assessment
About 2 hours, and you can stop anytime
All 16 dimensions in a single adaptive interview. Produces a full participant report, a scorecard, and a personalized development plan. Save and pick it back up whenever you want.
Start my assessmentNot ready for either? Take the four-minute Decision Snapshot instead. Six decisions, no account.
What you get
A preview of your team report
Natalie Brooks and her team are a demo org, not real people, and no real participant’s data appears here. Every panel below is the same component your own team view renders: the team profile, every member against every dimension, shared strengths and gaps, readiness across the team, one-on-one agendas, and movement since the last assessment.
Team profile
Average score across each competency group.
- The team spans five job levels (Principal 2, Director 1, Product Manager 2, Senior 2, Analyst 1), so the profile below is a raw roll-up of eight people, not a level-fair comparison. Use the within-level view to decide where to invest.
- Across all eight, Ethics & Responsibility has the highest raw average (7.5) and AI-Era Product Leadership the lowest (5.6), but every dimension sits within two points of the others, so treat this as a description of the group, not a ranking of needs.
- Within a level the pattern differs: the two Principals average lowest on Execution & Delivery Discipline and Technical Competency (5.5 each), while the two Product Managers average lowest on People Leadership (3.5). Groups of one or two people are too small to rank, so check each person before acting.
Every member, every dimension
| Team member | Strategy | Execution | Leadership | Commercial | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Team member | Strategy | Market | Innov. | AI Lead. | Priority | Exec. | Data | Tech | Comms | Stake | People Lead. | Op. Model | Comm. | Cust. | Ethics | Learn. Veloc. |
| Elena Petrov | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 |
| Frank Rogers | 9 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 9 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 6 |
| Jane Walsh | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 7 |
| John Smith | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 6 |
| Jordan Alvarez | 5 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Marcus Bennett | 9 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 7 |
| Maya Chen | 3 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 8 | |
| Priya Nair | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 9 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 7 |
Elena Petrov
Strategic Thinking
- Product Strategy
- 6
- Market & Competitive Judgment
- 5
- Innovation Behavior
- 5
- AI-Era Product Leadership
- 5
Execution & Judgment
- Prioritization & Judgment
- 5
- Execution & Delivery Discipline
- 4
- Analytics & Data Judgment
- 5
- Technical Competency
- 5
Leadership & Influence
- Communication & Executive Presence
- 7
- Stakeholder Management & Influence
- 6
- People Leadership & Talent Development
- 9
- Product Operating Model Maturity
- 7
Commercial & Customer Judgment
- Commercial & Business Acumen
- 6
- Customer Centricity
- 6
- Ethics & Responsibility
- 6
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability
- 5
Frank Rogers
Strategic Thinking
- Product Strategy
- 9
- Market & Competitive Judgment
- 8
- Innovation Behavior
- 7
- AI-Era Product Leadership
- 5
Execution & Judgment
- Prioritization & Judgment
- 8
- Execution & Delivery Discipline
- 8
- Analytics & Data Judgment
- 7
- Technical Competency
- 7
Leadership & Influence
- Communication & Executive Presence
- 9
- Stakeholder Management & Influence
- 9
- People Leadership & Talent Development
- 8
- Product Operating Model Maturity
- 8
Commercial & Customer Judgment
- Commercial & Business Acumen
- 8
- Customer Centricity
- 8
- Ethics & Responsibility
- 9
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability
- 6
Jane Walsh
Strategic Thinking
- Product Strategy
- 6
- Market & Competitive Judgment
- 5
- Innovation Behavior
- 5
- AI-Era Product Leadership
- 5
Execution & Judgment
- Prioritization & Judgment
- 7
- Execution & Delivery Discipline
- 7
- Analytics & Data Judgment
- 6
- Technical Competency
- 5
Leadership & Influence
- Communication & Executive Presence
- 6
- Stakeholder Management & Influence
- 6
- People Leadership & Talent Development
- 4
- Product Operating Model Maturity
- 5
Commercial & Customer Judgment
- Commercial & Business Acumen
- 6
- Customer Centricity
- 8
- Ethics & Responsibility
- 8
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability
- 7
John Smith
Strategic Thinking
- Product Strategy
- 6
- Market & Competitive Judgment
- 6
- Innovation Behavior
- 5
- AI-Era Product Leadership
- 5
Execution & Judgment
- Prioritization & Judgment
- 6
- Execution & Delivery Discipline
- 6
- Analytics & Data Judgment
- 4
- Technical Competency
- 5
Leadership & Influence
- Communication & Executive Presence
- 9
- Stakeholder Management & Influence
- 8
- People Leadership & Talent Development
- 6
- Product Operating Model Maturity
- 6
Commercial & Customer Judgment
- Commercial & Business Acumen
- 6
- Customer Centricity
- 6
- Ethics & Responsibility
- 7
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability
- 6
Jordan Alvarez
Strategic Thinking
- Product Strategy
- 5
- Market & Competitive Judgment
- 4
- Innovation Behavior
- 7
- AI-Era Product Leadership
- 8
Execution & Judgment
- Prioritization & Judgment
- 5
- Execution & Delivery Discipline
- 6
- Analytics & Data Judgment
- 7
- Technical Competency
- 8
Leadership & Influence
- Communication & Executive Presence
- 4
- Stakeholder Management & Influence
- 4
- People Leadership & Talent Development
- 3
- Product Operating Model Maturity
- 5
Commercial & Customer Judgment
- Commercial & Business Acumen
- 3
- Customer Centricity
- 5
- Ethics & Responsibility
- 7
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability
- 7
Marcus Bennett
Strategic Thinking
- Product Strategy
- 9
- Market & Competitive Judgment
- 9
- Innovation Behavior
- 7
- AI-Era Product Leadership
- 6
Execution & Judgment
- Prioritization & Judgment
- 7
- Execution & Delivery Discipline
- 7
- Analytics & Data Judgment
- 7
- Technical Competency
- 6
Leadership & Influence
- Communication & Executive Presence
- 7
- Stakeholder Management & Influence
- 7
- People Leadership & Talent Development
- 6
- Product Operating Model Maturity
- 7
Commercial & Customer Judgment
- Commercial & Business Acumen
- 8
- Customer Centricity
- 7
- Ethics & Responsibility
- 8
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability
- 7
Maya Chen
Strategic Thinking
- Product Strategy
- 3
- Market & Competitive Judgment
- 4
- Innovation Behavior
- 6
- AI-Era Product Leadership
- 5
Execution & Judgment
- Prioritization & Judgment
- 5
- Execution & Delivery Discipline
- 6
- Analytics & Data Judgment
- 8
- Technical Competency
- 6
Leadership & Influence
- Communication & Executive Presence
- 4
- Stakeholder Management & Influence
- 4
- People Leadership & Talent Development
- Product Operating Model Maturity
- 4
Commercial & Customer Judgment
- Commercial & Business Acumen
- 4
- Customer Centricity
- 7
- Ethics & Responsibility
- 7
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability
- 8
Priya Nair
Strategic Thinking
- Product Strategy
- 7
- Market & Competitive Judgment
- 6
- Innovation Behavior
- 6
- AI-Era Product Leadership
- 6
Execution & Judgment
- Prioritization & Judgment
- 9
- Execution & Delivery Discipline
- 9
- Analytics & Data Judgment
- 7
- Technical Competency
- 6
Leadership & Influence
- Communication & Executive Presence
- 6
- Stakeholder Management & Influence
- 7
- People Leadership & Talent Development
- 5
- Product Operating Model Maturity
- 7
Commercial & Customer Judgment
- Commercial & Business Acumen
- 6
- Customer Centricity
- 7
- Ethics & Responsibility
- 8
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability
- 7
Strengths and gaps
Your team spans different job levels, so strengths and gaps are ranked within each level rather than across them. Raw scores are not a fair comparison between a more senior and a less senior role. This is the view to act on.
Showing the top 3 strengths and top 3 gaps here; the full report includes more dimensions.
Principal Product Manager2 members
Team strengths
- Product Strategy2 people scored
- People Leadership & Talent Development2 people scored
- Market & Competitive Judgment2 people scored
Lowest averages
- Technical Competency2 people scored
- Execution & Delivery Discipline2 people scored
- AI-Era Product Leadership2 people scored
Director of Product1 member
Team strengths
- Product Strategy1 person scored
- Communication & Executive Presence1 person scored
- Stakeholder Management & Influence1 person scored
Lowest averages
- AI-Era Product Leadership1 person scored
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability1 person scored
- Technical Competency1 person scored
Product Manager2 members
Team strengths
- Ethics & Responsibility2 people scored
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability2 people scored
- AI-Era Product Leadership2 people scored
Lowest averages
- People Leadership & Talent Development2 people scored
- Commercial & Business Acumen2 people scored
- Market & Competitive Judgment2 people scored
Senior Product Manager2 members
Team strengths
- Prioritization & Judgment2 people scored
- Execution & Delivery Discipline2 people scored
- Communication & Executive Presence2 people scored
Lowest averages
- People Leadership & Talent Development2 people scored
- Technical Competency2 people scored
- Analytics & Data Judgment2 people scored
Product Analyst1 member
Team strengths
- Analytics & Data Judgment1 person scored
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability1 person scored
- Customer Centricity1 person scored
Lowest averages
- Product Strategy1 person scored
- Commercial & Business Acumen1 person scored
- Product Operating Model Maturity1 person scored
Readiness distribution
- Developing3members
- Near Ready2members
- Ready2members
- Strongly Ready1member
Elena’s next 1-on-1 agenda
Talking points
- Recognize a current strength: People Leadership & Talent Development.
- Discuss the development focus area: Execution & Delivery Discipline (4/10).
- Discuss the development focus area: Innovation Behavior (5/10).
- Discuss the development focus area: Learning Velocity & Adaptability (5/10).
- Several areas share the same score. Agree which matters most for the career goal before choosing a focus.
- Surface any blockers on assigned learning activities.
- Agree on one concrete commitment before the next 1-on-1.
Strengths
- People Leadership & Talent Development (9/10)
Development focus
- Execution & Delivery Discipline (4/10)Its objective is complete; confirm the change with evidence at the next check-in. Evidence confidence: high.
- Innovation Behavior (5/10)No objective in the plan yet. Evidence confidence: medium. Tied at 5/10 with 6 other areas. 5 tied areas are not listed. The score cannot separate them, so choose using the career goal.
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability (5/10)No objective in the plan yet. Evidence confidence: medium. Tied at 5/10 with 6 other areas. 5 tied areas are not listed. The score cannot separate them, so choose using the career goal.
Ordered by score, lowest first. Where scores tie, an area with an open objective comes first (this quarter, then a later quarter), then the area with firmer evidence (higher confidence), then alphabetical order. An area whose only objective is already complete is listed after the rest of its tie, to confirm the change with evidence at the next check-in.
Active objectives
No active objectives in this quarter. Everything planned for it is complete.
Completed this quarter
- Establish an early-warning habit for at-risk cross-team commitmentscomplete
Execution & Delivery Discipline
- ✓ Practice: Run a lightweight pre-mortem on your next launch
- ✓ Practice: Track committed versus delivered scope for the next three releases
- Formalize a prioritization framework so calls stop changing directioncomplete
Prioritization & Judgment
- ✓ Practice: Re-rank your current backlog with explicit criteria and compare it to the existing order
- ✓ Practice: Write down the three things you chose not to do last quarter and what each cost
Movement since last assessment
Illustrative example, not real data. Movement appears here once a team member re-takes the assessment. Here is what that looks like for Elena Petrov on two dimensions.
- Execution & Delivery Discipline+1increase3 months ago3Today4
- Prioritization & Judgment+1increase3 months ago4Today5
Want the read-only roster and an individual member deep-dive? See the full sample team report.
Team decisions
Built for the questions managers actually bring to a team review
Everyone you invite answers realistic product judgment prompts, and each answer is probed for evidence, context, scale, and results before any of it reaches your team view.
Who on my team is ready for the next level?
Readiness is reported separately from current level and carries its own confidence rating, so it reads as evidence you can discuss rather than a verdict handed down.
Where is my team collectively thin?
Strengths and gaps aggregate across everyone who completed an assessment, so a shared weakness shows up as a team pattern instead of five unrelated notes.
What should this person’s next 1-on-1 be about?
Each member gets an agenda built from their own evidence, so coaching starts from specific work rather than a general impression.
Am I holding everyone to the same standard?
Every person is assessed against the same 16 dimensions and evidence standard, so the comparison across your team rests on one framework, not on who you have seen most recently. Adaptive interviews may follow different question paths, and formal validation and adverse-impact analysis have not been done.
Is anyone actually growing?
Movement since the last assessment shows which dimensions changed and which did not, so development plans can be checked instead of assumed.
Before you start
- How long does it take?
- About 2 hours, across as many sittings as you like. Your progress saves after every answer, so it moves at your pace, one question at a time.
- Who receives the report?
- You always receive your own developmental report. If an organization sponsored your assessment, they receive a separate report written for their decision. You are told which applies before the interview begins.
- Does this replace human judgment?
- No. The report is built to inform a hiring, promotion, or development conversation, not to make the decision on its own.
See your team through one evidence standard
This is what a manager sees once their team completes the assessment. Set it up for your own team in a few minutes.