Skip to content

Run the precise survey

By default the assessment is evidence-first: it places the repo-observable dimensions from what it finds in the filesystem and infers the behavioural ones from your clarifying answers. That's fast and good enough for most teams.

When you want a rigorous, defensible per-dimension score — for a baseline you'll track over quarters, or to compare teams — opt into the survey.

Ask for it

When you start the assessment, say so:

Run the assessment, and administer the survey for a precise per-dimension score.

Or, mid-run, when the tool offers the evidence-first placement:

I'd like the rigorous survey scoring for the dimensions instead.

What changes

  • For each dimension you want scored precisely, the assessment administers marker statements on a Strongly-Disagree (1) → Strongly-Agree (5) scale — two statements per level.
  • It takes the higher-scoring level as the dimension's placement; ties resolve to the higher level.
  • The rest of the report (Habitat Maturity Level, cognitive read, Habitat Build Gap, recommendations) is computed exactly as in the evidence-first run.

When to choose which

Use evidence-first (default) when… Use the survey when…
You want a quick read of where you stand. You're setting a baseline to track over time.
The repo is rich with habitat signals. You need a number you can defend to stakeholders.
You're iterating frequently. You're comparing several teams on the same scale.

Next