ASSESSMENT
Adoption is a behavioural problem long before it is a tooling problem.
Most AI programmes are not defeated by the technology. They are defeated by anxiety nobody named, a team that has learned failed experiments are held against them, and leaders who talk about the tools without using them. This instrument measures those six conditions directly, per person and per team, so a rollout can be sequenced around what is actually true.
You receive
Six behavioural conditions, eight items each. None of them measures technical skill, and that is the point — every one is something a programme can change, and each fails a rollout in its own recognisable way.
Whether a person believes their ability with these tools can grow, or treats it as something other people happen to have. Where it is low, training is attended and not applied.
How much dread the subject provokes, and whether that feeling can be held steadily enough to still try something. Low scores show up as quiet non-use that no dashboard explains.
Whether the tool is treated as a colleague to work with and check, or as either an oracle or a threat. Both extremes are expensive: one ships unchecked output, the other ships nothing.
How the person handles a working method changing underneath them — which is what an adoption programme actually asks of them, whatever the business case says it is asking.
Whether trying something new and having it fail is survivable or quietly career-limiting. Nobody experiments their way up a learning curve they can be punished for climbing.
What leaders are visibly doing. Teams read the behaviour of the person above them far more accurately than the memo, and act on the reading rather than the memo.
The two dimensions that most reliably decide whether a rollout is adopted or quietly resisted. A programme that addresses nothing else should address these.
AI Anxiety and Emotional Regulation
8 items. Carries 20 per cent of the composite.
Change Readiness and Adaptability
8 items. Carries 20 per cent of the composite.
The remaining four shape how far and how fast adoption spreads once it has started. They matter after the first two, not instead of them.
AI Growth Mindset
8 items. Carries 15 per cent of the composite.
Collaborative Intelligence
8 items. Carries 15 per cent of the composite.
Psychological Safety for AI Experimentation
8 items. Carries 15 per cent of the composite.
Leadership AI Modeling
8 items. Carries 15 per cent of the composite.
Three further items look at response style rather than readiness. They tell whoever reads the result how literally to take it, which matters when a whole department returns suspiciously healthy numbers. They carry no weight in the score.
Response-style check
3 items. Not scored as readiness and not part of the index.
Every band comes with a different move, which is the reason to measure rather than guess. The cut-points are fixed and published, so the same score means the same thing in every team and every quarter — and a second reading after a change is comparable to the first.
Below 2.0
Adoption will be actively resisted. Start with the conversation, not the tool.
2.0 to 2.75
Willing in principle, stuck in practice. Small, low-stakes wins move this group.
2.75 to 3.5
Neither pulling nor pushing. Whichever way the team leads, this group follows.
3.5 to 4.25
Ready to adopt with support. The natural first wave of a rollout.
4.25 and above
Already ahead. Better used to carry others than to be trained further.
There is a free self-check on this site: 5 dimensions, five questions, about two minutes. It gives you a zone rather than a score, and nothing to fill in first.
Try the free self-checkSample output
Alongside the index and the six dimension scores, the report carries a risk flag wherever a dimension or the composite falls low, and a prescription for every dimension under 3.5 — a named programme and a session count, ordered by urgency rather than by dimension.
Three reports are produced: the individual report, a team report that shows where a group clusters and where it is thin, and an executive summary written for the people funding the programme.
Tells you which teams will carry the programme and which will need the conversation before the tool, while there is still time to sequence it.
Separates a tooling problem from a readiness problem. They look identical from a usage dashboard and need opposite responses.
Leadership modelling is one of the six dimensions for a reason. An executive summary reports it back plainly.
Rigour
This measures readiness to adopt, not competence with any particular tool, and it is not a judgement of a person's value to the organisation. It should never be the sole basis for a hiring, promotion or exit decision.
AI Readiness