01 · STRUCTURE10, 30, or 60 minutes
Structural Clarity
Clear responsibilities and decision authority
Use whenPeople are unsure who owns the work, handoffs multiply, or roles overlap.
Explore this diagnostic →Start with the problem
What is getting in the way?
You do not need to know the cause before you begin. Choose the recurring problem that is easiest to recognize. The matching diagnostic will ask about that part of the organization.
Four diagnostics
Examine one part of the organization at a time.
Each diagnostic has its own questions and scoring model. Every completed run returns a score, a result band, and an Executive Report. Q²-SODI also saves the scope and version details needed for a later comparison.
02 · OPERATIONS10, 30, or 60 minutes
Operational Systems
Unnecessary process work
Use whenReporting, coordination, or recurring administrative work takes time without a clear benefit.
Explore this diagnostic →03 · DECISIONS10, 30, or 60 minutes
Decision Velocity
Delays in making decisions
Use whenImportant decisions wait for approvals, move through too many steps, or return to the same people.
Explore this diagnostic →04 · PERFORMANCE10, 30, or 60 minutes
Institutional Performance
Reliable delivery and response to change
Use whenThe concern extends beyond one workflow and appears across the organization.
Explore this diagnostic →What you receive
Every run returns a score, a band, and a report.
The result is based on the structured answers submitted for the defined scope. It describes those responses; it does not independently establish the health or performance of the organization.
01
A consistent score
The same structured answers receive the same score when the diagnostic and scoring versions are unchanged.
02
An Executive Report
A plain account of the submitted answers, important patterns, possible implications, and questions to examine next.
03
A record for later comparison
Q²-SODI saves the scope, participant perspective, depth, and version so you can tell whether two runs are suitable for comparison.
How to use Q²-SODI
Define the scope. Run the diagnostic. Compare later.
01 · DEFINE
Choose a specific scope.
Name one workflow, decision path, business unit, or other area. Then choose the participant perspective that best fits the person responding.
02 · RUN
Complete the matching diagnostic.
Answer the questions, receive the score and band, and save the Executive Report in your Workspace.
03 · COMPARE
Repeat on the same basis.
A later run with matching scope and settings can show whether the submitted answers and score changed. It does not prove why they changed or that an intervention caused improvement.
Across your organization
From one report to an organizational view
One run
One person completes a diagnostic and receives a score, a report and practical next steps for the work they described.
Invite participants
Invite people who know the work within your defined scope. Review individual reports and compare represented teams, departments or divisions when the evidence is compatible.
Depth Synthesis
Bring suitable responses to one diagnostic together to see the typical result, the range of responses and differences between participant groups.
Cross-Lens Synthesis
Compare suitable results from different diagnostics while keeping each measure visible. The Workspace shows whether the evidence supports a combined score or a recommended campaign path.
Time and cost scenarios use separate operating records and explicit assumptions, not diagnostic scores. Personal Synthesis is a separate option for comparing your own saved runs; it does not turn one person's responses into team evidence.
How to interpret the evidence
Methodology and sources
Understand what a report shows, who is represented and when the evidence is sufficient for a broader recommendation.
01 · RESULTS
Understand what the results show.
Each report identifies the work being examined and whose perspective it reflects. Monderman's engine calculates the scores and sets the rules for interpreting the evidence. AI supports research and explains the results within those rules. The supporting answers remain available for review.
02 · PARTICIPATION
See who is represented.
For a campaign, define the group you want to understand. The Workspace shows participation and which perspectives are still missing.
Participation is counted separately for each diagnostic. Each person counts once, even if they complete that diagnostic more than once.
Depth Synthesis brings together suitable responses to one diagnostic. Cross-Lens Synthesis compares different diagnostics while keeping their results distinct.
03 · NEXT STEPS
Match the action to the evidence.
Smaller groups can still receive useful summaries and practical next steps. Broader recommendations require additional checks on participation, comparable results and supporting operational evidence. A combined Cross-Lens score has its own requirements. The Workspace shows which checks are met and what is still needed.
Our participation reporting draws on selected guidance from AAPOR's Standard Definitions. Our time and cost scenarios draw on selected practices from GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide for documenting measurements, assumptions and costs. Monderman's scoring and readiness rules are its own. Financial scenarios show potential staff-time value separately from cash savings.
Technical methodology and review status
01 · REPORTED EVIDENCE
Keep the source and scope visible.
Results describe the submitted answers for a defined work scope, participant perspective, time window, and instrument version. A versioned engine calculates scores and controls which comparisons and actions are eligible. AI can explain authorized evidence; it cannot change those scores or grant readiness.
Participation is counted separately for each diagnostic. Each person counts once, even if they complete that diagnostic more than once. Different perspectives can coexist without proving disagreement, and a later score change does not establish its cause.
02 · PARTICIPATION
Show who is represented and who is missing.
Campaign checks distinguish included runs from recorded participants and show participation against a locked, sponsor-declared eligible population. Repeated runs do not increase participation, and excluding a response does not shrink that population. Account identity and a sponsor's declaration do not independently verify every person or the population.
Our participation checks draw on AAPOR's Standard Definitions, 10th edition (2023) for transparent accounting of participation and missing responses, while distinguishing participation from evidence quality. Our campaign counts are not claimed as AAPOR response rates, and participation alone does not establish representativeness.
03 · DECISION LIMITS
Read readiness as a bounded check.
Where the required population and evidence are available, campaign readiness checks whether the population median would remain in the same instrument score band even at the lowest and highest possible missing scores. Compatible versions, declared role coverage, and one included response per participant are also checked. There is no universal response percentage that makes a report valid.
Independent statistical review: not reviewed. Stable bands do not validate the instrument, prove a cause, or establish that an intervention works. A recommended campaign path also requires an authorized review of operational evidence, applicability, prerequisites, and risk. Small-group display limits protect privacy; they are not validity thresholds.
Our operational cost scenarios draw on selected practices in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide (GAO-20-195G) for defining scope and documenting activity measurements, source references, assumptions, implementation costs and subscription costs. Customer-defined low, central and high cases compare combined assumptions. This is not full compliance with the guide. Potential staff capacity is shown separately from cash effects. Monderman does not independently audit the source records, and these scenarios are not forecasts or measured savings.
Published guidance is a reference, not endorsement, certification, or validation of Monderman. Automated tests and AI review are software checks, not independent scientific review. Financial figures, when available, remain conditional scenarios rather than realized savings or proven return on investment.