Loading...
Loading...
PivotIQ 360 · Leader view
Private liberal arts · 910 faculty and staff · 601 responses (66%)
Human Capacity Index
org-wideMean of the six measured domains below.
Strongest domain
Team Safety & Cohesion
68/100
Growth edge
Retention & Flight Risk
51/100
Executive summary
1 requiring action nowOverall, this organization scores 60 out of 100 — healthy. 601 people answered, which is 66% of those asked. Team Safety & Cohesion is the strongest thing here at 68. Retention & Flight Risk is the weakest at 51. Engagement is 66 and Retention is 51: people believe in the work and are leaving anyway. Everything below says who should own it, by when, and how you'll know in 90 days whether it worked.
Confidence · adequate
66% of people answered — 601 in total. The company-wide picture is solid. Be a little more careful with the smallest teams than the biggest ones.
Most urgent first, not in score order. Open “why we’re saying this” under any finding to see exactly what triggered it.
This is the pattern leaders most often miss, because a strong engagement number is reassuring enough to stop anyone acting. Belief in the mission is being counted on to keep people, and it isn't working. Put the effort into career path, the relationship with the manager, and fairness — not more mission messaging, which is already landing.
What triggered it. Engagement is strong, retention is clearly weaker, and the gap between them is 12+ points.
Why that matters. Engagement measures whether people believe in the work. That's a different thing from whether they intend to stay, and the two come apart often.
When these two are weak together, it usually means managers aren't being supported, and that's showing up as people leaving one level below them. So it looks like a turnover problem and it's really a manager problem — which means money spent on the employees rather than on their managers won't do much.
What triggered it. Both leadership and retention are below the green range.
Why that matters. The relationship with the manager is one of the three pieces inside the retention score, so these two are connected by design. Treat this as confirmation, not as separate proof.
The company-wide figure of 59 describes neither of them. Reporting this one number is exactly how a struggling team stays invisible inside an acceptable average — and it's what a single climate survey score does automatically.
What triggered it. This is the area where groups differ most, and they differ by 15+ points.
Look underneath it: Empowerment & Autonomy is 56, while Coaching & Development is 60. Empowerment & Autonomy is the piece to work on. Aiming at the area as a whole spreads your effort across both and moves neither.
What triggered it. This area scored between 40 and 60 — the amber range.
Look underneath it: Recovery & Reset is 60, while Load & Appraisal is 64. Recovery & Reset is the piece to work on. Aiming at the area as a whole spreads your effort across both and moves neither.
What triggered it. This area scored between 40 and 60 — the amber range.
This is what's currently holding things together while other areas struggle. It's also the easiest thing to spend without noticing, because nothing breaks loudly when a strength slips. Work out what's producing it before you change anything that touches it.
What triggered it. The highest-scoring area, and it's in the green.
1 of the 1 areas you actually worked on moved enough to count. Anything that moved elsewhere is drift — report it that way. Claiming it as a result is what makes people doubt the next report.
What triggered it. Went up by 5 points or more.
A healthy area that doesn't move hasn't failed to improve. There was nothing to fix, and the effort correctly went elsewhere. Report these as held, not as flat.
What triggered it. Barely moved, and still in the green.
The order matters as much as the list. An organization that tries to fix all six areas at once fixes none. Each item says who owns it, by when, and how you’ll know in 90 days whether it worked.
Pick one thing: Recognition & Fairness, inside Retention & Flight Risk. Give it one owner and one change to make. Don't start a second effort somewhere else at the same time.
Owner
HR / People lead, with an executive sponsor named
By when
Planned within 2 weeks, running within 4
Because. Retention & Flight Risk is your lowest area at 51, and Recognition & Fairness at 48 is what's pulling it down.
Verified by. Recognition & Fairness up 5 points or more when you remeasure in 90 days.
Start with Facilities & dining instead of rolling this out everywhere. Widen it to other groups only after the 90-day result.
Owner
Programme owner
By when
When you plan it
Because. Facilities & dining is well below the other groups, and a company-wide rollout spends the same money where things are already fine.
Verified by. Facilities & dining closes at least half the gap to the company average by the next round.
Stop using mission and purpose messaging to try to keep people. Put that effort into the three things retention is actually made of — career path, the relationship with their manager, and fairness — and have stay conversations with the group most at risk.
Owner
HR business partner + line managers
By when
First 30 days
Because. People already believe in the work. That isn't what's missing, so more messaging about it can't fix a problem it isn't causing.
Verified by. Retention up 5 points or more, with most of the movement coming from the manager relationship.
Spend the retention budget on the managers, not their teams. Give the lowest-scoring managers real support — coaching, a smaller team, or something taken off their plate — then remeasure at 90 days.
Owner
HR lead + the managers' own managers
By when
Within 60 days
Because. Leadership and retention are weak together, which usually means managers aren't supported and people below them are leaving as a result.
Verified by. Leadership up 5 points or more, with the manager relationship inside retention moving with it.
Within two weeks, tell everyone who answered what you found and the two things you've decided to change. Do it even if the plan isn't finished.
Owner
Executive sponsor
By when
14 days
Because. Saying nothing after asking people to answer is the fastest way to get a worse response rate next time — and the next round is what turns this from an opinion into a result.
Verified by. At least 66% answer again next round.
Put the 90-day remeasurement in the calendar now, at the same time you book the work — not after it finishes.
Owner
Programme owner
By when
This week
Because. A survey nobody runs again can't show that anything changed, and one booked afterwards almost always slips.
Verified by. A date is in the calendar, using the same team groupings as this round.
Each with its own three sub-dimensions
Exhaustion & Depletion
65/100
Cynicism & Detachment
58/100
Efficacy & Accomplishment
66/100
The Manager Relationship
53/100
Growth & Path
56/100
Recognition & Fairness
48/100
Meaning & Purpose
64/100
Energy & Vigor
67/100
Mattering & Voice
63/100
Vision & Direction
59/100
Coaching & Development
60/100
Empowerment & Autonomy
56/100
Inclusion Safety
70/100
Learner Safety
64/100
Challenger Safety
68/100
Load & Appraisal
64/100
Composure & Regulation
62/100
Recovery & Reset
60/100
Every group here clears the 5-person privacy floor
The same six domains, broken out by group. Where the free Baseline gives one org-wide number, this shows which teams are actually carrying the strain.
| Team | People | Burnout | Retention | Engagement | Leadership | Team | Pressure |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Faculty | 320 | 59 | 48 | 73 | 48 | 66 | 59 |
| Student affairs | 190 | 54 | 51 | 73 | 58 | 68 | 51 |
| Research & library | 130 | 62 | 44 | 60 | 56 | 70 | 61 |
| Facilities & dining | 170 | 63 | 46 | 66 | 50 | 66 | 58 |
| Administration | 100 | 67 | 49 | 66 | 58 | 67 | 66 |
Same instrument, same people, 2026-05-26 vs 2026-02-23 — the only way to know whether a program changed the conditions instead of just running and hoping.
Aggregate & consent-first — individual answers are never shown, in the demo or the real product.
Kesterly College doesn't exist. The six domains, eighteen sub-dimensions and scoring above are exactly what a real respondent completes — take it yourself and see.