Sample team report
See the complete sample team view.
This deep-dive report shows every competency, readiness signal, development recommendation, and one-on-one view for a frozen demo team.
What a manager sees for their team
Below is Natalie Brooks’ team: a team profile radar, strengths and gaps, a heatmap of every person against every dimension, a read-only roster, and progress tracking across the whole team, the same views a manager sees after their team completes the assessment. One member, Elena Petrov, is shown in full further down, including her complete report and her next 1-on-1 agenda.
Team profile
Average score across each competency group.
Based on 8 of 8 team members who have completed an assessment. Dimensions a person was not evaluated on are left out of that person’s average, not counted as zero.
Raw roll-up, not level-fair. Your team spans 5 job levels, so this combines people held to different expectations. Read it as a description of the group, and use the within-level view below to decide where to invest.
- Principal Product Manager: 2
- Director of Product: 1
- Product Manager: 2
- Senior Product Manager: 2
- Product Analyst: 1
Levels with fewer than three people (Principal Product Manager, Director of Product, Product Manager, Senior Product Manager, Product Analyst) are too small to rank on their own; treat their averages as individual results.
- 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.
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.
Principal Product Manager2 members
Team strengths
- Product Strategy2 people scored
- People Leadership & Talent Development2 people scored
- Market & Competitive Judgment2 people scored
- Communication & Executive Presence2 people scored
- Product Operating Model Maturity2 people scored
- Commercial & Business Acumen2 people scored
- Ethics & Responsibility2 people scored
- Stakeholder Management & Influence2 people scored
Lowest averages
- Technical Competency2 people scored
- Execution & Delivery Discipline2 people scored
- AI-Era Product Leadership2 people scored
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability2 people scored
- Analytics & Data Judgment2 people scored
- Prioritization & Judgment2 people scored
- Innovation Behavior2 people scored
- Customer Centricity2 people scored
Director of Product1 member
Team strengths
- Product Strategy1 person scored
- Communication & Executive Presence1 person scored
- Stakeholder Management & Influence1 person scored
- Ethics & Responsibility1 person scored
- Market & Competitive Judgment1 person scored
- Prioritization & Judgment1 person scored
- Execution & Delivery Discipline1 person scored
- People Leadership & Talent Development1 person scored
Lowest averages
- AI-Era Product Leadership1 person scored
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability1 person scored
- Technical Competency1 person scored
- Analytics & Data Judgment1 person scored
- Innovation Behavior1 person scored
- Customer Centricity1 person scored
- Commercial & Business Acumen1 person scored
- Product Operating Model Maturity1 person scored
Product Manager2 members
Team strengths
- Ethics & Responsibility2 people scored
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability2 people scored
- AI-Era Product Leadership2 people scored
- Execution & Delivery Discipline2 people scored
- Analytics & Data Judgment2 people scored
- Technical Competency2 people scored
- Customer Centricity2 people scored
- Innovation Behavior2 people scored
Lowest averages
- People Leadership & Talent Development2 people scored
- Commercial & Business Acumen2 people scored
- Market & Competitive Judgment2 people scored
- Product Operating Model Maturity2 people scored
- Stakeholder Management & Influence2 people scored
- Communication & Executive Presence2 people scored
- Product Strategy2 people scored
- Prioritization & Judgment2 people scored
Senior Product Manager2 members
Team strengths
- Prioritization & Judgment2 people scored
- Execution & Delivery Discipline2 people scored
- Communication & Executive Presence2 people scored
- Stakeholder Management & Influence2 people scored
- Ethics & Responsibility2 people scored
- Product Strategy2 people scored
- Product Operating Model Maturity2 people scored
- Customer Centricity2 people scored
Lowest averages
- People Leadership & Talent Development2 people scored
- Technical Competency2 people scored
- Analytics & Data Judgment2 people scored
- AI-Era Product Leadership2 people scored
- Innovation Behavior2 people scored
- Commercial & Business Acumen2 people scored
- Market & Competitive Judgment2 people scored
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability2 people scored
Product Analyst1 member
Team strengths
- Analytics & Data Judgment1 person scored
- Learning Velocity & Adaptability1 person scored
- Customer Centricity1 person scored
- Ethics & Responsibility1 person scored
- Innovation Behavior1 person scored
- Execution & Delivery Discipline1 person scored
- Technical Competency1 person scored
- AI-Era Product Leadership1 person scored
Lowest averages
- Product Strategy1 person scored
- Commercial & Business Acumen1 person scored
- Product Operating Model Maturity1 person scored
- Stakeholder Management & Influence1 person scored
- Communication & Executive Presence1 person scored
- Market & Competitive Judgment1 person scored
- Prioritization & Judgment1 person scored
- AI-Era Product Leadership1 person scored
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
Team roster
- Strategy5.3Execution4.8Leadership7.3Commercial5.8
- Frank RogersDirector of ProductStrategy7.3Execution7.5Leadership8.5Commercial7.8
- Jane WalshProduct ManagerStrategy5.3Execution6.3Leadership5.3Commercial7.3
- John SmithSenior Product ManagerStrategy5.5Execution5.3Leadership7.3Commercial6.3
- Jordan AlvarezProduct ManagerStrategy6.0Execution6.5Leadership4.0Commercial5.5
- Marcus BennettPrincipal Product ManagerStrategy7.8Execution6.8Leadership6.8Commercial7.5
- Maya ChenProduct AnalystStrategy4.5Execution6.3Leadership4.0Commercial6.5
- Priya NairSenior Product ManagerStrategy6.3Execution7.8Leadership6.3Commercial7.0
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
How to read readiness and confidence
Readiness
How prepared someone appears to take on the next level's scope, based on the evidence gathered in their assessment.
- Not ReadySignificant gaps against the next level's expectations.
- DevelopingEarly signs of next-level capability, with clear growth areas remaining.
- Near ReadyMost next-level expectations are met; a few gaps remain.
- ReadyMeets the next level's expectations across the dimensions assessed.
- Strongly ReadyExceeds the next level's expectations, with headroom beyond it.
Confidence
How much evidence backs that readiness call, not how good the outcome is.
- Low confidenceLimited evidence: a small sample of decisions, or gaps in what was assessed.
- Medium confidenceA reasonable evidence base, with some areas better covered than others.
- High confidenceStrong, consistent evidence across most or all dimensions assessed.
Elena Petrov
Manager viewA growth-focused view of this assessment. It does not include the hiring-calibration questions evaluators see.
THE TEAM COACH, WITH AN OPERATING MODEL BUILDER EDGE
Still growing into the role. Developing toward the next level.
Based on 16 of 16 dimensions evaluated in this interview. 4 scores rest on thin evidence: they are included, flagged, and not a demonstrated weakness.
01 — Scorecard
Scorecard
Strategic Thinking
Average 5.3
2 on thin evidence, included in the average and not a demonstrated weakness
[Participant interview] Presented a confident strategic narrative, but could not give a concrete tradeoff example when asked for specifics.
Thin evidence in this interview.
Confidence is lowered because her answers became less specific under follow-up questions. One participant interview, no other evidence source.
Has a general awareness of the competitive landscape without a distinctive point of view.
[Participant interview, self-reported] Described encouraging her PMs to experiment, and acknowledged her own follow-through on bets is inconsistent.
Talks about AI in strategy documents but has not translated it into a concrete initiative.
Thin evidence in this interview. A low score here reflects what was shown, not a demonstrated weakness or a conclusion about readiness.
Execution & Judgment
Average 4.8
1 on thin evidence, included in the average and not a demonstrated weakness
Prioritization calls are reasonable in isolation but change direction often enough that her team has started discounting them.
[Participant interview, self-reported] Described three of the last five committed cross-team deliverables slipping without early warning to stakeholders.
Self-reported in one participant interview. She described the pattern across several examples rather than a single incident.
[Participant interview] Cited metrics confidently but could not say where one of them came from.
Thin evidence in this interview. A low score here reflects what was shown, not a demonstrated weakness or a conclusion about readiness.
Adequate for the role; not a differentiator either way.
Leadership & Influence
Average 7.3
Genuinely strong presenter, confident and articulate with senior stakeholders.
[Participant interview, self-reported] Described good working relationships, and also acknowledged that some stakeholders have been frustrated by missed commitments.
[Participant interview, self-reported] The strongest part of her interview. She gave specific coaching examples, including two direct reports she says were promoted while she coached them.
[Participant interview, self-reported] Described building a planning ritual for her group and said other groups adopted it.
Commercial & Customer Judgment
Average 5.8
1 on thin evidence, included in the average and not a demonstrated weakness
[Participant interview] Spoke fluently about business goals. When asked how she reached a business decision, her reasoning leaned on her director's framing rather than her own analysis.
[Participant interview, self-reported] Described delegating most direct customer contact to her PMs, so her own read of customer needs is secondhand.
Thin evidence in this interview.
No concerns identified; handled one sensitive personnel issue appropriately.
[Participant interview] When asked about a strategy that was not working, described restating the plan rather than revising it.
02 — Evidence
Evidence-Based Findings
Strongest Evidence
- [Participant interview, self-reported] Describes coaching two direct reports to promotion, with specific examples of the coaching moments.
- [Participant interview, self-reported] Describes building a planning ritual for her group that she says other groups adopted.
Role-Context Implications
- Excellent fit for a people-development-heavy role; current reliability pattern is a real risk for a role with more cross-team delivery accountability.
Meaningful Gaps
- [Participant interview, self-reported] Describes three of the last five committed cross-team deliverables slipping without early warning.
- [Participant interview] Strategic narrative was confident, but answers became less specific when follow-up questions asked for detail.
Contradictions
- [Participant interview] Describes her approach as highly strategic, yet could not give a concrete example of a strategy tradeoff when asked twice.
Unsupported Claims
- [Participant interview] Cited a metric without being able to say where it came from. No other source was available to check it.
03 — Level Fit
Level Fit & Readiness
Current Level: Principal Product Manager
Titled at Principal Product Manager, but delivery reliability evidence does not yet support being fully at level; people leadership is well above it.
Target Level: Director of Product
Not yet evidenced. The execution reliability pattern is the main development area to address and re-assess. This is a development read, not a promotion decision, and it needs human review.
Already Proven
- People leadership and coaching
- Building durable team processes
Not Yet Proven
- Reliable cross-team delivery
- Strategic depth beyond the surface narrative
Evidence Still Needed
- Two consecutive cross-team commitments delivered on time with proactive, early communication of risk.
04 — Strengths, Risks & Development
Strengths, Risks & Development
Top Strengths
- People leadership and talent development
- Operating model design
- Executive presence
Top Risks
- Delivery reliability on cross-team commitments
- Strategic narrative thinner than it first appears under questioning
Derailers
- [Participant interview, self-reported] Pattern of missed cross-team commitments without early escalation.
Development Actions
- Put an explicit early-warning escalation habit in place for any at-risk commitment, and track it for two full quarters.
- Have a skip-level review her next strategy document for concreteness before it is presented.
- Keep her people-development strengths separate from the delivery development area, so that neither is used to judge the other.
Suggested Next Experiences
- Own one cross-team delivery commitment for two consecutive quarters with a visible, proactive risk-escalation habit before revisiting promotion.
Strong people-leadership evidence in this interview. Her own account also describes an execution reliability pattern on cross-team commitments. This is a development-focused reading of one participant interview and needs human review before it informs any decision. Address delivery consistency, then re-assess.
Evaluating yourself instead? See the individual sample report.
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
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.