Free Team Potential Indicator | Tilt 365 Assessment
Team Potential Indicator

Team Potential Indicator

Learn about your team's health, potential, and performance.

We did the research for you and found important predictors of team success. The Free Team Potential Indicator is a set of short assessments validated in the empirical research on teams. The report explains the different factors important to team health and potential so you can understand your strengths and weaknesses. Simply fill out the form below to get started...

Frequently Asked Questions

There are several "types" of teams, but they share characteristics that make them different from groups of individuals. We define a team as an interdependent group of people who may or may not report to the same supervisor and are collectively responsible for accomplishing shared goals. The degree of interdependence can vary, so it is more of a continuum than a dichotomy of team/group. The final call for whether a group is a team is ultimately a judgment call where someone will have to decide whether or not the groups tasks and goals are interconnected enough, but team dynamics matter more with more interdependence.

Measures were modified from existing validated measures used in research, and the references to the original sources are provided below.:

(1) Barczak, G., Lassk, F., & Mulki, J. (2010). Antecedents of team creativity: An examination of team emotional intelligence, team trust and collaborative culture. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(4), 332. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00574.x

(2) De Jong, B. A., & Elfring, T. (2010). How does trust affect the performance of ongoing teams? the mediating role of reflexivity, monitoring, and effort. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 535-549. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.51468649

(3) Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. doi:10.2307/2666999

(4) Greer, L. L., Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2008). Conflict transformation: A longitudinal investigation of the relationships between different types of intragroup conflict and the moderating role of conflict resolution. Small Group Research, 39(3), 278-302. doi:10.1177/1046496408317793

(5) Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2018). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams: A reflection. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 205-212. doi:10.1177/1745691617697078

(6) Mathieu, J. E., Kukenberger, M. R., D'Innocenzo, L., & Reilly, G. (2015). Modeling reciprocal team cohesion-performance relationships, as impacted by shared leadership and members' competence. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3), 713-734. doi:10.1037/a0038898

(7) Palanski, M. E., Kahai, S. S., & Yammarino, F. J. (2011). Team virtues and performance: An examination of transparency, behavioral integrity, and trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(2), 201-216. doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0650-7

(8) Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., Hakanen, J., Salanova, M., & De Witte, H. (2017, October 17). An Ultra-Short Measure for Work Engagement: The UWES-3 Validation Across Five Countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication.

The assessments measures several aspects of teams that have been related to team learning, innovation, and performance. These include things like psychological safety, cohesion, trust, and engagement. The report breaks these factors down into the factors that influence team health, factors that result from team health, and the current perception of team performance.

No! This is meant to inform developmental decisions and teams a way to gauge their growth. Performance evaluation should be more specific to the organization the reflect the team's goals.