Most of what The GAiGE measures is about the tools: what they saved, what they cost, whether they're worth keeping. This pulse is about the people. It measures how AI adoption feels across your organisation, which is a different question from how any one tool performs, and it's the question that decides how the rest of the programme is received.
It's also a different job from The AI Capability Check. Capability asks "can you do your job with these tools", tool by tool. Sentiment asks "how does the whole thing feel": the pace, the support, and where help would make the most difference.
What it asksLink to this section
Five questions, well under a minute:
- Pace. How the pace of AI adoption feels: too fast, about right, too slow, or "it doesn't feel planned". That last option matters: a team that finds the pace fine but the plan invisible needs communication, not a slower rollout.
- Positivity. How positive they feel about the way you're using AI, on a 1-10 slider.
- Support. When a tool changes how they work, how supported they feel, from "well supported" to "unsupported".
- Where help would make the most difference. Knowing which tool to use for what, getting better results from the tools they have, understanding what's allowed, or "nothing, I'm set".
- An optional comment for leadership, in their own words.
Like every library pulse, its questions are locked so the trend holds up month to month; the schedule, delivery window and colour are yours to set.
Who receives it, and whenLink to this section
Everyone. The pulse is organisation-wide rather than about one tool, so it goes to every member of your organisation, including people who aren't assigned to any tool yet. That's deliberate: the people no tool has reached are often the ones with the most to say about pace and support, and a sentiment read that skips them would flatter the programme.
Monthly by default. Sentiment moves slowly, and asking more often measures survey fatigue rather than adoption. It arrives in the browser on its schedule like every other pulse, and it's skippable like every other pulse.
It lives in the pulse library (Pro) and arrives paused when you add it, so nothing reaches your team until you've reviewed the schedule and switched it on.
Reading the reportLink to this section
The report leads with two gauges:
- Sentiment: the average of the 1-10 positivity score, normalised like every other gauge.
- Support: how supported people feel when tools change their work.
Below them, the Breakdowns section shows the full distribution for the pace and where-help questions, not just an average. The pace split is usually the most interesting: a healthy programme typically shows "about right" in the majority with a visible "too fast" minority. If that minority grows, another tool rollout may lose those people. Watch whether it grows.
The where-help question shows what to do next. If "getting better results from the tools I have" leads, your next investment is AI learning, not another licence. If "understanding what's allowed" ranks high, publish the policy people clearly haven't seen.
Comments are shown word for word. On an anonymous pulse, comments show without names, and the five-person minimum applies: below five people in a period, the report says fewer than five people answered rather than showing the splits.
Using it wellLink to this section
Run it unchanged for a few months before drawing conclusions; the value is in the trend line, not any single month. And when a month's result prompts a change (a slower quarter, a written policy, more hands-on help), say so to your team. People answer more when they can see what changed.
Something missing or out of date here? Tell us.