TeamEQ uses the methodology of applied improvisation as a central tenet behind the competencies that are recommended as well as the questions that we recommend people start to ask in order to get staff more into the attributes that the manager wants them to be in better.

Applied improvisation is a preferred model for shifting and changing mindset to behaviours around soft skills. It is also been chosen because of the amount of research and practical application has been done since 1922 and actively since 1959.

Applied improvisation emphasizes active listening, collaboration, building on others’ ideas, and adapting to the present moment—skills that foster creativity, adaptability, and resilience. By engaging participants in real-time scenarios, these techniques enhance a team’s ability to think on their feet, innovate, and respond effectively to change.

However, the biggest breakthrough where academic research started to match the basis applied improvisation was around work done by Dr. Charles Limb in 2012 (“Neural substrates of spontaneous musical performance: An fMRI study of jazz improvisation“). In short, when improvisation is used, neurology of the mind shifts from orientating the mind from shame and protection towards openness.

They have also been a number of authoritative books Brittain around the field of improvisation and it’s using business that we use as reference material. There are at least three books which would recommend: “Getting to Yes And” by Bob Kuhlan (Stanford University Press), “Improv Wisdom: Don’t Prepare, Just Show Up” by Patricia Ryan Madson (Bell Tower) and just recently published “The ‘Yes And’ Business Evolution: Improv Skills for Leadership and Life” by Tracy Shea-Porter (Modern Wisdom Press).

The inherently engaging and enjoyable nature of applied improvisation makes learning memorable, leading to better retention and application of skills. Teams that find joy in the learning process are more likely to carry those skills forward, creating lasting improvements in performance.

With a solid foundation in nearly 100 years of improv theory and practice, applied improvisation brings a credible and proven approach to skill development. Even if a tool builds on applied improvisation, it can draw on the rich credibility of these principles to provide a strong, research-backed foundation for growth and learning

Tools like Five Behaviours, Team Effectiveness Survey, DiSC, Hogan, LCP, etc., primarily focus on individual strengths, often quantifying behaviors. Traditional workplace assessments have similarly emphasized individual attributes like personality and skills.

These tools primarily focus on individual strengths, often quantifying behaviors, rather than on relationship dynamics and their impact on team performance. While tools exist to assess team-level dynamics, they may not be as widely used or recognized as individual assessment tools. Some tools might indirectly touch on alignment by revealing communication breakdowns or conflicts, but they often lack a direct focus on measuring the extent to which these misalignments impact organizational goals.

Individual attributes are generally easier to measure than complex team-level dynamics. Given the strong emphasis on individual performance and accountability in many organizations, individual assessment tools remain a popular choice.

These tools may not delve as deeply into relational dynamics as TeamEQ does. They often provide general assessments rather than focusing on specific situations, and may not capture the precise issues causing team misalignment.

However, TeamEQ complements these assessments by providing insights into team member interactions. It offers a more comprehensive view by specifically focusing on alignment, while other tools provide insights into individual behaviors and broader team dynamics.

TeamEQ recognizes that teams are more than just a collection of individuals, but entities with unique dynamics, behaviors, and relationships. Understanding these team-level factors is essential for effective teamwork and organizational success. While existing tools are valuable, they may not provide a complete solution for measuring alignment.

TeamEQ offers a more granular analysis of individual team members and their interactions, going beyond surface-level assessments.
TeamEQ also specifically measures psychological safety, a critical factor for team performance and innovation that may not be fully addressed by other tools.

Alignment is a universal concern: Organisations of all sizes and industries strive for alignment between their goals and their employees’ motivations. This is because alignment is essential for:

• • Increased productivity: When employees understand how their work contributes to the organization’s goals, they are more likely to be motivated and engaged.
  • Improved employee satisfaction: Employees who feel aligned with their organization’s mission are more likely to be satisfied with their jobs and committed to the company.
  • Reduced turnover: When employees feel aligned with their organization’s goals, they are less likely to leave for another job.
  • Enhanced innovation: Alignment can foster a culture of innovation by encouraging employees to think creatively about how their work can contribute to the organization’s goals

Measuring alignment is challenging: While organisations recognize the importance of alignment, measuring it can be difficult. Your tool, by offering to measure alignment, addresses a pain point for many organizations.

Alignment between a team and its manager regarding what it takes to be high-performing is crucial for both the health and profitability of the team’s work. When team members and their manager share a common understanding of performance expectations, they can coordinate efforts effectively, prioritize tasks accurately, and work towards shared goals without confusion or conflicting priorities. This alignment ensures:

1. Clear Expectations: Everyone knows what success looks like, reducing misunderstandings and ambiguity.
2. Cohesive Effort: Aligned focus minimizes wasted effort and increases productivity, with everyone pulling in the same direction.
3. Enhanced Collaboration: Team members are more likely to collaborate effectively when they agree on goals and how to achieve them.
4. Motivation and Morale: Shared vision fosters a sense of purpose, which positively affects morale and engagement, both critical to sustained productivity.
5. Informed Decision-Making: When aligned, decisions—whether by team members or the manager—are more likely to support overall objectives.

Without alignment, teams may experience inefficiencies, reduced morale, miscommunication, and conflict, ultimately undermining both team health and profitability.

.

Yes. Recent legislative changes in Australia have expanded the scope of company directors’ responsibilities to include psychosocial risks, alongside traditional physical health and safety concerns. This shift underscores the growing importance of mental health in the workplace.

While physical workplace health and safety has long been a legal requirement, compliance and risk assessment have often been sufficient to mitigate liability. However, addressing psychosocial risks presents a more complex challenge.

Directors now bear a heightened duty of care to ensure a psychologically safe work environment. This proactive approach is legally mandated, and failure to comply can result in significant consequences, including personal liability, fines, and even imprisonment.

The increasing number of compensation claims related to bullying, harassment, and other adverse workplace conditions, as reported by SafeWork Australia and state-level agencies, highlights the severity of the issue.

To mitigate these risks and meet compliance obligations, organisations must adopt effective methodologies and practices that can be objectively measured and evaluated. And one of those services that provide a pathway is TeamEQ.

We use Qualtrics

SOC 2 Type II Certification

Qualtrics obtained a SOC 2 Type II report for the trust principles of Security, Availability, and Confidentiality. The report can be provided via the Trust Center or self-service repository.

ISO 27001, 27017, 27018, and 27701 Certifications

Qualtrics achieved ISO 27001, 27017, 27018, and 27701 certifications. A copy of the certificates can be provided via the Trust Center or self-service repository.

FedRAMP Authorization

Qualtrics is FedRamp Authorized. FedRAMP is the standard of U.S. government security compliance, with over 300 controls based on the highly-regarded NIST 800-53 that requires constant monitoring and periodic independent assessments. More information is found at https://www.fedramp.gov.

IRAP

Qualtrics has undergone an IRAP Assessment and has been issued an IRAP Audit Report. IRAP has over 700 controls based on the Australian Information Security Manual (ISM). More information is found at https://www.cyber.gov.au/acsc/view-all-content/programs/irap.

HITRUST

To better support our healthcare customers, Qualtrics achieved the HITRUST certification. The validated report can be provided via the Trust Center or self-service repository.

TISAX

Qualtrics follows the question catalog of information security of the German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA ISA). The TISAX (Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange) Assessments are conducted by the accredited audit providers that demonstrate their qualification at regular intervals. The result is exclusively retrievable over the ENX Portal: https://enx.com/tisax.

PCI – XM Discover VOC Data Integration Only

To better service customer service centers, the XM Discover Voice of Customer Data Integration is PCI DSS certified to handle call recording that may contain payment card information. The Attestation on Compliance (AOC) can be provided via the Trust Center or self- service repository.

To minimise bias, we implement comprehensive question design and analysis techniques. Our approach includes:

• Paired Comparisons: We strategically pair similar questions to identify potential inconsistencies.
• Cultural Sensitivity: We use culturally appropriate language to ensure inclusivity.
• Inclusive Assessment: We design assessment tasks that are accessible to all respondents, regardless of their background.

We actively monitor for biases, such as Status Quo Bias, where individuals may prefer maintaining the status quo even if it’s suboptimal.

Additionally, we continuously seek feedback from clients and participants through presentations and one-on-one interviews with leaders. This invaluable input allows us to refine our methods and question selection. By staying informed about industry best practices, we strive to deliver the highest quality assessments.”

.

Individual strengths and traits are crucial for personal growth and self-development. While we provide insights into individual strengths and weaknesses, our focus is on understanding how these factors contribute to the overall team performance.

And, within a team context, these strengths may not always remain consistent. Factors such as status, leader-follower dynamics, approval or disapproval, social hierarchies, and compatibility can influence how—and whether—those strengths are expressed.

TeamEQ focuses on the team as a collective entity, examining how the dynamics among members impact overall performance. This approach minimizes the need to assess individual strengths in isolation, instead allowing us to understand each person’s role within the broader context of the team.

While understanding innate talents provides valuable context, the primary emphasis should be on assessing and developing the specific skills, behaviors, and mindsets that foster effective collaboration, communication, and teamwork. By focusing on these observable and trainable competencies, relateEQ™ can enhance individuals’ and teams’ ability to work together and relate to others, regardless of their innate talents.

When evaluating how individuals interact in collaborative and interpersonal contexts, the focus should be on their actual behaviors, skills, and tendencies. Although understanding innate abilities offers useful insights, the key is how individuals apply these strengths in real-world scenarios.

In summary, while recognizing innate talents is helpful, the primary focus for relateEQ™ should be on evaluating and developing the skills, behaviors, and tendencies that enable effective collaboration and interpersonal interactions. This approach aligns with many leading business evaluation systems used across Australia.

Your focus on team dynamics can indeed be your unique selling proposition (USP). Unlike many assessment tools that prioritize individual strengths and weaknesses, your emphasis on how individuals perform within a team context distinguishes you. This perspective is valuable because, as you’ve pointed out, individual behaviors can fluctuate significantly depending on the team environment.

Additionally, TeamEQ was explicitly designed with teams in mind, further enhancing its relevance and impact.

The optimal assessment frequency depends on the team’s pace of change and desired level of insight.

For rapidly evolving teams, monthly assessments offer granular data and quick response times.

For most teams, quarterly assessments provide a balanced approach, allowing for meaningful change and measurement.

The tool helps quantify the time it takes to implement changes and observe their impact, enabling teams to optimize their assessment cadence.

We begin by discussing initial findings with the manager to determine what insights should be shared with the team and how to interpret these insights effectively, leveraging their knowledge of the team and understanding of team dynamics.

A common challenge in teams is reluctance to address issues directly with the manager, often out of fear that doing so could jeopardize their job security. For team members to feel comfortable opening up, managers need to foster a culture of openness where feedback is encouraged and free from any form of retaliation or consequences.

When we present insights to the team, we are mindful of these dynamics, helping all participants draw out the most constructive insights that can be applied effectively in their work.

We recognize that fear of negative feedback can be a barrier. TeamEQ’s analysis provides a nuanced view of team dynamics, which may highlight areas needing improvement. While this could raise concerns about morale, conflict, or even job security, we work to ensure that feedback is framed constructively to support growth and resilience rather than fear.

TeamEQ centers on cultivating a culture built on the Four Pillars: being heard, trusted, respected, and feeling psychologically safe. When these core needs are met, change becomes less intimidating, fostering an environment where team members feel secure to express concerns and embrace change. Here are some ways to address this:

1. Acknowledge this fear openly within the team: Recognizing and addressing fear is key to embracing change. Many individuals are trapped in a “survival mode” mindset due to financial worries or uncertainty, leading to conflict avoidance. Team members may lack confidence or skills to speak up, especially if they feel marginalized. To foster a culture of openness and innovation, create a safe space for expressing concerns without fear. When individuals feel heard and valued, they are more likely to embrace change rather than resist it. Common obstacles include fear of conflict, desire for stability, and groupthink, which can stifle dissent and limit the consideration of alternative viewpoints.
2. Start with Small Changes: Introducing change gradually allows team members to adapt at a manageable pace, reducing anxiety and the potential for conflict. Celebrating small wins along the way also helps build positive momentum.
3. Highlight the Benefits of Change: Clearly communicate the positive impact of change on both the team and individual roles. When people understand the reasons behind a change and the benefits it can bring, they’re more likely to feel motivated to embrace it.
4. Encourage Active Listening and Empathy: Train leaders and managers to actively listen to team members’ concerns. Acknowledging these concerns with empathy helps to build rapport and reduce resistance.
5. Provide Conflict Management Support: Equip teams with conflict resolution tools and techniques to handle disagreements constructively. When conflict is normalized as part of healthy collaboration, it becomes less intimidating and more manageable.

By addressing fears directly and creating a supportive environment, teams can navigate change more smoothly and with less resistance.

Survey dishonesty is a common challenge. To mitigate this, we strategically place and duplicate questions to identify inconsistencies. These discrepancies, highlighted in our reports, provide actionable insights.

It’s crucial to understand why participants might not be truthful or be decietful to ‘get back’ at their manager, even in anonymous surveys. Addressing underlying issues can improve survey accuracy and overall workplace culture.

We recommend open conversations with staff, assuming honesty. In a psychologically safe environment, you can directly address inconsistencies and uncover the root causes.

Our reports include qualitative responses for further context. By taking proactive steps to address identified issues, you can minimize the impact of survey dishonesty.

This is a common question that comes up.

First, the survey being anonymous can lead to people being more honest, but it isn’t a sure thing.

What the results give you is a state of the team, and what each individual brings to the team. and then maybe some individuals that need focus.

What you do get is the average, and with the standard deviation, you can see how much the internal teams are aligned with their answers. The higher the standard deviation, the wider the answers.

What you know to be true? Is your answer about how you believe they think. The wire of the gap between the two of you, the more urgent the questions need to be asked about why there is a gap. If the team has given 53% average answer to a question, and you have given them 90%, then something is not aligned. The next steps would be to take care of that.

And out of any future conversations, will reveal who would’ve answered with a low evaluation and who would’ve answered with a higher evaluation.

So exploring and going further into why there is a gap, you end up finding who it is without demanding that they show themselves through either the anonymized The answers or pulling people up in a meeting to get them to explain themselves. whenever we suggest taking the next steps, these are two avenues that we don’t recommend.

Single Report:

• Baseline Establishment: Encourage managers to compare results against established goals or KPIs. This initial data point serves as a foundational benchmark.
• Performance Improvement: If the average team performance is below expectations, use this baseline to identify areas for improvement and implement targeted strategies to enhance performance.

Multiple Reports:

• Progress Tracking: Multiple reports facilitate the measurement of progress and the identification of trends over time.
• Benchmarking Best Practices: Compare results across different teams to identify high-performing areas and adopt best practices.

Cross-Team Benchmarking:

• Targeted Benchmarking: Select specific questions or attributes from different teams to establish relevant benchmarks.
• Performance Optimisation: Identify the highest-performing teams for each question or attribute and use these as aspirational benchmarks to drive overall performance improvement.