Status. PEAKTEAMS is in early access. The item bank is built on published team research (see the references on the methodology page), but no reliability or validity coefficients have been published for it yet. Section 6 states what is missing and when we expect to report it. Nothing on this page should be read as a claim of validation.

1. What the instrument measures

The team survey measures a team's own view of how it works, on 18 KPIs drawn from the team-effectiveness literature and arranged along the Input, Process and Output stages of the IMOI model, with Friction as a fourth, negatively keyed group. The unit of analysis is the team: every score is an aggregate over the members who answered. The instrument does not score individuals and is not a personality or performance test.

Stage	KPIs
Input (5)	Purpose & Objectives, Values & Vision, Environment & Resources, Team Organization, Leadership Principles
Process (10)	Social Cohesion, Innovation & Growth, Delivery Methodology, Inner Drive, Identification & Engagement, Feedback & Development, Motivation & Focus, Trust & Safety, Communication Culture, Conflict Navigation
Output (2)	Team Output, Organizational Impact
Friction (1)	Friction & Consumption

Two further scores are derived rather than measured directly: Team Cohesion (how much members agree across all items; lower spread means higher cohesion) and Adaptability (fed by Innovation & Growth items). Neither counts as one of the 18. Each KPI's definition is on the methodology page.

2. Items per instrument

Performance Snapshot

The default team survey (about 12 minutes per member) and, without the open-text question, the free team check (57 questions, about 8 minutes, no signup).

Block	Items	Notes
Team identity	12	Three two-statement items per dimension, four dimensions.
KPI items	39	Two items for each of the 17 scored KPIs (34), plus three reverse-keyed items (one each for the Input, Process and Output stage), a retention-risk item and a team-stability item. One Innovation & Growth item also feeds the derived Adaptability score.
Friction items	6	Friction & Consumption; higher means more friction. Two items weigh 1.0, four weigh 0.5.
Open text	1	Optional. Team survey only; the free check collects numeric answers only.
Total	58 (57 in the free check)

Performance Deep-Dive

The in-depth follow-up (about 30 minutes). No identity items, no friction items, so it produces no Team Net Value; results drill down to item level per KPI.

Block	Items	Notes
KPI items	204	Twelve items for each of the 17 scored KPIs, organised in nine modules. Innovation & Growth items also feed Adaptability.
Reverse-keyed items	9	One per module, to counter acquiescence bias.
Total	213

With two items per KPI, the Snapshot is a screening instrument: it is built to show where a team should look first, not to produce precise KPI estimates. The Deep-Dive, with twelve items per KPI, is the instrument for item-level analysis and for the reliability work in section 6.

3. Response scale

KPI and friction items: a five-point agreement scale (Strongly disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly agree), scored 1 to 5. Reverse-keyed items are inverted at scoring time, so that 5 is always the favourable end for KPI items. Friction items keep their direction: 5 means the most friction.
Identity items: five steps between two opposite statements (for example “priorities are set mainly inside the team” versus “mainly by customers, stakeholders or the market”). There is no right answer; the item places the team on a dimension.
Items are presented one module at a time. Answers are saved as they are given, so a member can pause and resume.

4. Scoring

Item and KPI scores

An item's score is the mean of the valid answers across members (1 to 5, rounded to one decimal), with the standard deviation on the same scale as the agreement measure.
A KPI's score is the mean of its items' scores; one item, one vote. The overall score is the mean of the KPI scores, excluding Friction.
Agreement bands on the standard deviation: below 0.8 counts as high agreement, 1.2 and above as a split team. Item scores at or above 4 are reported as strengths, below 3 as growth opportunities, below 2.5 as critical.
With fewer than 9 responses, one person can move an item across an agreement cut, so agreement statistics are labelled as hints rather than verdicts in the results.

Team Net Value (Snapshot only)

TNV = Value(Input, Process, Output) × (1 − Friction tax)

Value is the average of the Input, Process and Output stage scores rescaled to 0 to 100. Friction acts as a tax on that value: no tax at a friction score of 1.0, the whole value at 5.0. The result is a 0 to 100 score; below 40 is flagged as needing attention, above 60 as high-performing. These cut-offs are design decisions, not empirically derived norms.

Identity scoring (Snapshot only)

Four dimensions (Focus, Structure, Interaction, Value Creation), three items each. Each answer is mapped to a −5 to +5 scale, where −5 is the left statement and +5 the right one, sign-corrected for items whose left statement belongs to the right pole.
A dimension's score is the mean over its items and members. The sign chooses the dimension's letter; the four letters name one of the 16 team identities.
Lean threshold: when the absolute dimension score is below 1, the team “leans” towards that pole rather than “is” it, and the results say so. A dimension confidence (0 to 1) is derived from how closely members agree on that dimension.

5. Research lineage

The KPIs and the Input, Process and Output structure follow the team-effectiveness literature of the last two decades: the IMOI framing of team processes and emergent states (Ilgen and colleagues), Hackman's conditions for team effectiveness, Edmondson's work on psychological safety, the meta-analytic evidence on cohesion and performance (Beal and colleagues) and Google's Project Aristotle. The items were written for PEAKTEAMS; they paraphrase constructs from that literature and are not licensed copies of existing scales. The full reference list is on the methodology page.

6. What has not been established yet

Reliability. No internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach's alpha or McDonald's omega) per KPI, and no test-retest figures, have been published. With two items per KPI, the Snapshot's per-KPI reliability will be modest by construction; the Deep-Dive is the instrument we will report on first.
Validity. No factor-analytic evidence that the 18 KPIs are distinct, and no criterion validity against external team outcomes, has been published.
Norms. No norm tables by industry or team type exist yet. The benchmark report on /team-benchmarks states the number of teams and responses it is based on; read it as descriptive, not normative.
Aggregation. The product shows the spread of answers per item (standard deviation), but within-team agreement indices that justify aggregating individual answers to a team score, such as r_wg or ICC, have not been reported across teams.

Plan and target sample. We will report internal consistency per KPI for the Deep-Dive, and the inter-item correlations for the Snapshot, once the data allow a stable estimate. Our working estimate for that point is about 300 completed individual responses from at least 30 teams; this is an estimate, not a commitment to a date. Coefficients will be published on this page with the sample they were computed on. Reviewers who want to run their own analysis can request the item bank (section 7) and, with a signed research agreement, aggregated data.

7. Requesting the item bank

The full item wording, the KPI each item belongs to, the keying and the weights are documented at peakteams.io/item-bank. For a copy in a spreadsheet, for translation review or for a research collaboration, write to legal@peakteams.io with the intended use. We ask that the items are not re-published as a standalone test.