Read how the diagnosis works, with a worked example and FAQ ↓
Answer 8 questions (about 2 minutes) and get one verdict: skill gap, capacity gap, burnout or motivation gap, or healthy.
When a team misses its numbers, leaders usually reach for one of two answers: hire more people, or send the team on training. Pick the wrong one and you spend money without fixing anything. This diagnostic is for Sales, Product/Engineering and Support/Customer Success leaders. Answer 8 questions (about 2 minutes) and get one verdict: skill gap, capacity gap, burnout or motivation gap, or healthy. The verdict is free and instant; the full breakdown (what it means, what to do next, what to avoid and which data to check) is free with your work email.
How the diagnosis works
Why outcome data alone can't tell you why
Execution tools are good at showing what happened. Salesforce shows a flat pipeline. Jira shows a missed roadmap and slipping epics. A ticketing tool shows delayed tickets and breached SLAs. Looker turns all of that into a dashboard. None of them can explain why the gap exists, because the cause usually sits in data they don't hold: whether the people doing the work have the skills the role needs, and whether they are still engaged.
The same missed target can come from three very different causes, and each needs a different fix. Cross-referencing execution metrics with skill scores and engagement data is what turns a red number into a diagnosis.
The three data streams
1. Execution and deliverables
Pipeline, quota and win rate (CRM); epics, cycle time and bugs (Jira, GitHub); SLAs and CSAT (ticketing); product metrics (Looker or your BI tool). Shows outcomes.
2. Role-specific skills
Scores against a skills or competency matrix for each role and level, for example commercial acumen for an AE or architecture for an engineer. Shows capability. Templates: competency matrices.
3. Culture and engagement
Engagement survey or pulse trends, especially on workload and career growth, plus attrition signals. Shows motivation and flight risk.
Put together
Read all three for the same team and the same period. The pattern across them, not any single number, points to the cause.
The four verdicts and the logic behind them
| Verdict | Execution | Skills | Engagement | Right response |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skill gap (training need) | Missing targets | Low in core competencies | Any | Targeted coaching, structured growth plans or training. Not additional headcount. |
| Capacity gap (headcount need) | Missing pipeline or delivery goals | High | High or stable | Talent and motivation are not the issue; the team is stretched thin. Hire to unblock capacity, or cut scope. |
| Burnout / motivation gap (process need) | Often still high | Any | Dropping, especially on workload or career growth | Fix workload and process; treat it as a flight risk before attrition happens. |
| Healthy | Hitting targets | At or above bar | Stable | Keep measuring; develop your strongest people. |
The diagnostic scores your answers against these patterns. Two extra questions sharpen the call: whether demand has grown faster than headcount (which points to capacity) and how much of the team is new (a ramp-up problem looks like a skill gap until people are up to speed). If you tell it you don't assess skills or don't measure engagement, the result is marked low confidence, because that is exactly the blind spot the method is meant to remove.
Why engagement deserves its own stream: Gallup estimates that managers account for at least 70% of the variance in employee engagement scores across business units (Gallup, “Why Great Managers Are So Rare”). Engagement is something a team's leadership can change, which is why a falling trend is an early, actionable signal rather than background noise.
Got a verdict? Talk it through on a 15-minute discovery call, or start with what your review cycle costs today.
What to look at in Sales, Product and Support
| Team | Execution signals | Skills to check | Typical misread |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sales | Quota attainment, pipeline coverage, win rate, deal size and sales-cycle length by rep | Discovery and qualification, commercial acumen, negotiation, forecasting discipline | Hiring more reps when win rate (a skill signal) is the problem, or coaching reps who simply have too many accounts. |
| Product / Engineering | Epics delivered vs planned, cycle time, escaped bugs, the product metric each squad owns | Discovery, prioritisation, architecture, code quality, delivery | Adding engineers to a squad whose real problem is unclear prioritisation, or blaming skills when the roadmap doubled. |
| Support / CS | Backlog age, first-response and resolution times, CSAT, renewals or churn by owner | Product knowledge, troubleshooting, de-escalation, account planning | Reading a strong SLA quarter as health while the team quietly burns out covering volume growth. |
Worked example (illustrative)
A fictional example to show the reasoning. It is not drawn from a customer or a survey.
A Head of Sales sees two teams both at about 70% of quarterly quota. Team A's skill scores are low on discovery and qualification, and its win rate is falling while meeting volume is fine. Team B scores at or above the bar on every competency, engagement is stable, but each rep now covers far more accounts after a territory change. Same outcome in the CRM, two different causes: Team A gets coaching and a growth plan on discovery (skill gap); Team B gets a hiring case (capacity gap). A third team at 110% of quota with falling engagement on workload and two strong reps interviewing elsewhere is the burnout case, and the most urgent of the three.
How Revolut People shows this in one place
The diagnosis only works if the three streams sit side by side for the same people. Revolut People brings them together: goals whose progress updates from the execution tools teams already use (integrations such as Jira, Salesforce and Looker), role skills assessed in scorecards during reviews, and culture and engagement data, so a leader can see outcome, capability and engagement for one team in one view instead of three tools and a spreadsheet. Published customer stories describe parts of this, for example Paynetics (Jira-linked goals and skills gaps surfaced for development) and LiveFlow (goal tracking automated through integrations). See Revolut People performance management for the product.
Next: build the skills side with the competency matrix templates, link team goals to company goals with the goal cascade worked example, or check your process with the performance health check.
Sources: Gallup, Why Great Managers Are So Rare. The verdict logic is the method described on this page; it is a decision guide, not a statistical model.
FAQ
Is anything I enter stored?
Your answers stay in your browser, and the verdict is shown without any form. If you unlock the full breakdown, we store your name, work email, company and role, plus your verdict and team type, so Ash can follow up. The site also counts, without cookies or IDs, that the diagnostic was started and which result was shown. See the privacy policy.
Why can't I just use Salesforce, Jira or Looker for this?
Those tools show outcomes: a flat pipeline, a missed roadmap, delayed tickets. They can't tell you why the gap exists. The why sits in data they don't hold: how skilled the people doing the work are against their role, and how engaged they are. You need both sides for the same team and period.
What if two results look plausible?
That is common. The tool shows one main verdict and flags a second one when its signals are also strong, for example a capacity gap that is starting to cause burnout. Fix the main cause first, and deal with the second in parallel if it involves flight risk.
Is this a validated psychometric or statistical model?
No. It is a structured decision guide that applies the logic on this page to your answers. Treat it as a prompt for a better conversation with your leadership team, and check the result against your own execution, skills and engagement data.
We don't have a skills matrix or engagement survey. Is the result useful?
Partly. Without skills or engagement data the tool can only lean on workload and demand, so it marks the result as low confidence. Start with the free competency matrix templates and a short engagement pulse, then re-run it.
How often should we run it?
Once a quarter per team, or whenever targets, headcount or scope change significantly. The value is in seeing a team move from healthy to stretched before it shows up as attrition.