Assessment

Culture & Innovation Diagnostic Survey (Seed)

A validated, short, ready-to-deploy diagnostic survey (interactive) to assess psychological safety, experimentation norms, leadership support, and operational resourcing for innovation. Collect responses anonymously, store them as JSON, and use the results to generate an anonymized scoring dashboard and recommended priority interventions.

Interactive Tool

Culture & Innovation Diagnostic Survey (Seed)

This short, validated diagnostic measures four practical areas that predict a team or unit's readiness to discover, experiment, and turn ideas into measurable results: psychological safety, experimentation & learning orientation, leadership sponsorship & incentives, and operational support & tooling.

Estimated time: 5–8 minutes. Responses are designed to be collected anonymously. Answer based on your current team or unit. There are no right answers—your responses will help prioritize areas for improvement.

Scoring (how responses will be used): Each item uses a 1–5 scale (1 = Strongly disagree; 5 = Strongly agree). Module scores are the mean of their items. Lower scores indicate opportunity areas. Suggested interpretation: mean ≥ 4.0 = strength; 3.0–3.9 = mixed; < 3.0 = priority improvement area. Use these scores with qualitative follow-up (discussions, observations) before making major decisions.

Include my responses in the aggregated anonymized report

If you say no, your responses will be recorded but excluded from aggregated reporting. For true anonymity, consider selecting yes unless you have concerns.

I feel safe speaking up about problems, mistakes, or differing opinions on this team.

Psychological safety: speaking up without fear of punishment or humiliation.

1.0 10.0

People on this team are comfortable asking for help when they need it.

Asking for help is treated as a normal part of learning and collaboration.

1.0 10.0

When mistakes occur, our team focuses on understanding and learning rather than blaming individuals.

A learning-oriented response to errors supports experimentation.

1.0 10.0

I can express a dissenting opinion without fear of negative consequences.

Dissent is tolerated and can be voiced respectfully.

1.0 10.0

Team members accept responsibility for outcomes rather than blaming individuals.

Collective responsibility supports open learning and improvement.

1.0 10.0

We regularly run small experiments to test new ideas.

Small, rapid experiments are valued over long, risky bets when appropriate.

1.0 10.0

When experiments don’t go as hoped, we treat the outcome as a learning opportunity.

Learning from controlled failure is core to improvement and innovation.

1.0 10.0

We capture and share lessons from experiments across the team or unit.

Knowledge-sharing prevents repeated mistakes and spreads useful practices.

1.0 10.0

Our team prioritizes learning alongside delivery (we balance short-term results with longer-term learning).

A learning orientation means value is placed on insights, not only immediate KPIs.

1.0 10.0

We have clear practices for designing, running, and evaluating experiments.

Methods and cadence for experiments reduce wasted effort and increase learning.

1.0 10.0

Team members feel empowered to try new approaches within agreed boundaries.

Autonomy with guardrails enables safe experimentation.

1.0 10.0

Leaders visibly support experimentation and new ideas.

Visible sponsorship reduces fear and signals priorities.

1.0 10.0

Performance metrics and incentives encourage learning and prudent risk-taking.

Incentives aligned to learning prevent perverse behavior.

1.0 10.0

Leaders allocate time and budget for experimentation.

Dedicated resources make experiments feasible and sustainable.

1.0 10.0

Leaders respond constructively when experiments fail.

Constructive responses maintain morale and encourage future experiments.

1.0 10.0

We have access to the tools, data, and environments needed to test ideas quickly.

Practical tooling and data access reduce experiment lead time.

1.0 10.0

Workflows and approvals enable rapid prototyping and iteration.

Efficient workflows prevent bureaucracy from stalling experiments.

1.0 10.0

Administrative processes do not unnecessarily slow down experiments.

Lean processes allow fast cycles without undue risk.

1.0 10.0

Roles and time are clearly defined so people can spend time on experiments.

Clear ownership and allocated time are practical enablers.

1.0 10.0

Team / Unit (optional)

Use a name or code to help administrators compare groups while preserving individual anonymity. Optional.

Role (optional)

Choose the option that best describes your role.

Approximate team size (optional)

Enter a whole number. Optional.

Additional comments (optional)

Any context you think is important about experimentation or culture in your team.

You can explore this tool now. Sign in or create an account to save your responses and return to them later.

Make this tool part of your work

Save a personal copy, bring it to your team, or tailor the questions and workflow to fit what you are hungry to improve.

Member customization and team collaboration are coming soon.

Discuss Ask the Librarian

Discussion

Comments and conversation will live here.

Culture & Innovation Diagnostic Survey (Seed)

Culture & Innovation Diagnostic Survey (Seed)

Discussion

Services

Explore

Contact