Huddle Metric Library

Huddle Metric Library

About the Metric library

The Teamgage metric library provides a curated set of validated Huddle metrics. These have been grounded in best-practice survey science and proven research on team effectiveness, psychosocial safety and risk management, and refined through Teamgage’s data and experience.

InfoFor more information about the design principles and research foundations applied, you can learn more here.
Huddle metrics are not designed to be static. Teams, organisations and conditions change, and the questions asked should change with them.
For this reason, Teamgage recommends a core + rotational approach:
  1. Select 4-6 core metrics that remain always on and are always relevant.
  2. Rotate 1-3 additional metrics alongside the core metrics (maintaining 7 total metrics per submission cycle) in response to specific organisational context, risk, or team priorities.


Why we recommend this approach:
  1. Maintains engagement by keeping the process fresh and relevant
  2. Supports targeted, effective action
  3. Improves data quality by reducing fatigue and repetition
  4. Supports clearer, more targeted action at team and leader level

How the metric library is structed

To help with your selection, metrics are grouped into three signal areas to help you understand what kind of insight each metric provides.
Strong Huddle pulses draw a small number of metrics across different signal areas to maintain balance and actionability.

Alert
Info
Metrics are provided as best practice guidance. We recommend tailoring the language to reflect your organisation’s own internal voice. For example, if one of your values is "Better Together", the Teamwork metric can be reframed to align with that language and sentiment. This keeps the experience meaningful for submitters and ensures insights connect clearly to your strategy, culture and values.

1) Communication, Clarity & Alignment

These metrics show whether people understand priorities, strategy and decisions, and whether their work connects meaningfully to them. They surface gaps between intent and execution before misalignment turns into drift.

Clarity

Question - How clear are priorities and expectations in your team right now?

Anchor Points - Clear | Mostly | Somewhat | Not really | Not clear 

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. What's one priority you feel really clear on right now, and one that still feels fuzzy for you?
      2. If you had to explain our top three priorities to a new team member today, what would you say — and where would you hesitate?
      3. Are there any areas where you're getting conflicting signals about what matters most? What's the tension?

Suggested actions
      - Highlight and reinforce what’s worked well
      - Reconfirm the top three priorities for this period
      - Make trade-offs explicit (“what we are not doing”)
      - Reinforce priorities consistently, not just once
InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Clear priorities reduce uncertainty, misalignment and wasted effort. When priorities are unclear, stress rises before performance drops. Research links goal clarity to higher productivity, faster decision-making and reduced role conflict.

Communication

Question - How clearly do you understand what's happening across [organisation] and why?

Anchor Points - Clear | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not clear

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Where have you felt most in the loop recently —or feel you found out later than you'd have liked?
      2. What's one thing you think the broader team doesn't know yet but probably should?
      3. If there's something still unclear or unanswered for you, what is it — and how is that affecting your work?


Suggested actions

      - Highlight existing communication channels and information shared
      - Clarify what’s changing, why and when. 
      - Acknowledge any areas where communication is lacking (even if you don't have the answers) and escalate when necessary
InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Poor communication increases uncertainty, resistance and stress. Research shows breakdowns in communication often precede declines in performance and wellbeing. 

Decision-Making

Question - How confident are you that recent decision-making is in the best interest of achieving our [goals/purpose]?

Anchor Points - Confident | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not confident |

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Is there a recent decision that landed well for you — what made it feel clear or fair?

      2. Is there a decision that's felt harder to get behind — what information or context would have helped?

      3. Are there decisions being made right now where you'd like more visibility or input?

Suggested actions

      - Name the trade-offs behind recent decisions, not just the outcomes
      - Explain what was weighed and rejected, not only what was chosen
      - Close the loop on decisions the team has already raised concerns about
      - Acknowledge any concerns and pass the lack of confidence signals upward

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Confidence in decision-making supports coherence, prioritisation, and motivation. Low scores suggest strategy may not be landing clearly at execution level. 

 Empowered

Question - How empowered do you feel to provide input into decisions that affect your work?

Anchor Points - Empowered | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not empowered

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Where do you feel like you have real say in how work gets done — and where do you feel like decisions happen above or around you?

      2. Is there a decision you've been escalating that you think your team could actually resolve locally?

      3. What's one thing we could do as a team to give each other more ownership over our day-to-day work?

Suggested actions

      - Clarify which decisions teams can influence or make
      - Invite input earlier in decision processes
      - Explain constraints and trade-offs transparently
      - Close the loop on how input was considered

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Empowerment reflects autonomy and perceived influence over work. Low empowerment increases strain and disengagement, particularly during change and is a key requirement for effectively managing psychosocial hazards. 

2) Performance & Execution

These metrics reflect how well the team converts effort into outcomes — clarity of roles, coordination, quality, follow-through and ways of working. They show where friction or rework is slowing performance.

Teamwork

Question - How effectively is your team work together right now?

Anchor Points - Effective | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not effective 

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. What's an example of the team working really well together recently — what made that work?

      2. Where are the handover or dependency points that feel clunkiest right now?

      3. Is there anyone on the team carrying something they probably shouldn't have to carry alone?

Suggested actions

      - Highlight and reinforce what’s worked well
      - Review handovers and dependencies
      - Clarify shared goals, success measures and how everyone's work contributes to this
      - Address signs of friction early

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Teamwork captures coordination and collaboration that underpin execution. Poor teamwork drives rework, frustration and hidden workload. 

Enabled

Question - How confident are you that your team has the skills, knowledge and resources needed to succeed?

Anchor Points - Confident | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not confident

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Where are you feeling most stretched in terms of skills or resources?

      2. Is there a task or area where you feel like the team keeps working around a problem rather than solving it?

      3. What's one thing — a tool, training, or support — that would make the biggest difference to your confidence right now?

Suggested actions
      - Highlight the resources and opportunities currently available - look to leverage these first before adding anything new
      - Identify the specific gap — "we can't do X" is actionable, "we're stretched" isn't?
      - Escalate gaps with the delivery consequence attached, not as a general ask

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Capability gaps surface as missed deadlines and quality issues long before they're named as gaps, because teams absorb them through overwork and workarounds.


Accountability

Question - How accountable is your team for following through on its commitments? 

Anchor Points - Accountable | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not accountable

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Where do you think the team is really following through well — what's enabling that?

      2. Are there commitments you've made or seen made that have felt hard to deliver on — what got in the way?

      3. What would make it easier for the team to flag early when something's at risk of slipping?


Suggested actions

      - Highlight and reinforce what’s worked well
      - Make commitments visible and specific
      - Address missed commitments early

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Accountability reflects clarity, trust and ownership. Low accountability increases rework, frustration and hidden workload. High accountability supports reliable execution and reduces stress caused by uncertainty. 

Quality

Question - To what extent has your team been delivering quality work?

Anchor Points

High | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Low

Manager Prompts

Ask your team 

      1. What does "good" look like for the work we're doing right now — is that clear and shared across the team?

      2. Where are you most proud of the quality we're delivering, and where do you feel we're cutting corners where we shouldn't?

      3. What's one change that would help us consistently hit the standard we're aiming for?

Suggested actions

      - Clarify what “good” looks like (standards, examples, definitions of done)

      - Strengthen peer review or quality checkpoints

      - Celebrate quality explicitly

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Quality is a leading indicator of performance health. Consistent delivery signals clarity, capability, and manageable demand. Declines often reflect overload, unclear expectations, fragmented processes, or reduced psychological safety — not lack of effort.

Efficiency

Question - How efficiently have you been able to get your priority work done?

Anchor Points - Efficient | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not efficient

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. What's one process, meeting, or approval step that feels like it slows you down more than it should?

      2. Where does your day feel the most productive, and where does it feel like friction is costing you time?

      3. If you could remove or fix one thing in how work is done, what would it be?

Suggested actions
      - Identify specific points of friction in workflows 
      - Simplify or remove low-value steps, meetings, or approvals
      - Clarify decision rights and escalation paths

Info

Why we recommend this metric:

Efficient ways of working reflects how team processes, tools, and norms enable or hinder effective work. When ways of working are misaligned, friction and rework increase even when effort is high.


Always Improving

Question - How consistently does your team take action to address challenges, remove barriers and improve?

Anchor Points - Consistently | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not consistently

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. What's one barrier or frustration you've raised before that's still unresolved — what's the blocker?

      2. Is there a small change we could trial together as a team this week or this month?

      3. What would it take for you to feel confident that when we raise an issue, something actually changes?

Suggested actions
      - Act visibly on one issue at a time
      - Involve the team in fixing friction
      - Close the loop on actions taken

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Team improvement capability reflects job control and system health. Teams that can identify and resolve issues locally experience lower sustained strain and stronger performance over time. 


Knowledge Sharing

Question - How effectively is knowledge being shared within your team?

Anchor Points - Effective | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not effective

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Is there knowledge or context that only you (or one or two people) hold right now?

      2. Where have you had to start from scratch on something that probably existed somewhere in the team?

      3. What's one thing we could document, share, or hand over better — and how could we make that happen?

Suggested actions
      - Create simple, shared artefacts (checklists, notes, recordings)
      - Protect time for handover and cross-training
      - Recognise and reinforce people who share openly
Info

Why we recommend this metric:
Perceived access to knowledge is a strong driver of confidence, performance and psychological safety. When knowledge stays tacit or siloed, teams become fragile — delivery slows, errors increase, and dependence on key individuals rises.

Customer Focus

Question - How focused is your team on delivering value to its customers?

Anchor Points - Focused | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not focused

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. When you think about the work you did this week, what was the clearest connection to a customer or end-user outcome?

      2. Is there work we're doing right now that you're not sure is adding real value to customers?

      3. What's one thing a customer or stakeholder has told you recently that our team should probably hear?


Suggested actions

      - Highlight and reinforce recent work that's delivered customer value
      - Clarify who the “customer” is for different types of work
      - Review priorities through a customer value lens
InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Customer focus is a critical execution signal. During change or delivery pressure, teams often drift inward, optimising for activity, process, or speed rather than value.  


Cross-Collaboration

Question - How effectively has your team been collaborating with others? 

Anchor Points - Effective | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not effective

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Where have you felt well supported by another team recently — what made that work?

      2. Where are you waiting on another team (or vice versa) in a way that's slowing things down?

      3. Are there working agreements or expectations with other teams that feel unclear or broken — what needs a reset?

Suggested actions

      - Clarify ownership and responsibilities at handover points
      - Make dependencies and timelines visible and explicit
      - Review working agreements with other teams (who does what, by when, and how)

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Cross-team collaboration is a critical execution and risk signal in interdependent organisations. Poor collaboration creates hidden delays, rework, frustration, and duplicated effort, often before delivery metrics show problems. 

[Project/Delivery] Confidence

Question - How confident are you that your team is on track to achieve its [project/delivery] goals?

Anchor Points - Confident | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not confident 

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. What's the one thing you're most confident we'll deliver well right now, and what's the one thing you're nervous about?

      2. Are there blockers or risks on the horizon that aren't visible enough yet to the team or to me?

      3. If we're off track somewhere, what's the most useful thing we can do to help course correct?

Suggested actions


      - Highlight and reinforce what’s worked well
      - Revisit scope, priorities, and sequencing
      - Address blockers explicitly - align effort with what actually matters

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Delivery confidence integrates signals across clarity, workload, and coordination. It often drops before formal performance measures, making it a valuable early indicator. 

Innovation

Question - How open is your team to embracing new ideas and ways of doing things?

Anchor Points - Open | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not open

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Is there a better way of doing something you've been thinking about but haven't raised yet — what's held you back?

      2. What's a recent change or experiment — big or small — that you think went well and we should keep?

      3. Where do you feel like the team defaults to "how we've always done it" when we might benefit from trying something different?


Suggested actions

      - Create safe space to trial small changes
      - Separate experimentation from performance evaluation
      - Acknowledge learning, not just success

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Innovation is linked to learning, adaptability, and long-term performance. Low openness often signals fear, overload, or low psychological safety.

Impact

Question - To what extent have you seen your recent work making an impact on our [goals/purpose]?

Anchor Points - High impact | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Low impact

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team:

      1. When you think about the work you've done recently, which part felt most meaningful — and which felt most disconnected?
      2. Is there work we're doing right now where you're unclear on why it matters — can you name it?
      3. What's one story or outcome from the last month that shows the difference our team's work is making?

Suggested actions

      - Explain why work is needed, not just what needs to be done
      - Reduce or remove low-value tasks that consume time without adding meaningful impact
      - Share recent stories that highlight how work has contributed to real outcomes

Info

Why we recommend this metric:

A sense of purpose is a core driver of engagement and retention. When work feels low in meaning, motivation and discretionary effort decline before performance visibly drops.

3) Job Demands & Sustainability

These metrics capture the human durability of performance — workload, energy, safety, respect, belonging and growth. They signal whether performance is being sustained or silently eroded.

Workload

Question - How manageable does your current workload feel?

Anchor Points - Manageable | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not manageable

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. What's taking the most time and energy this week — is that where you expected to be spending it?

      2. Is there anything on your plate right now that you think could be paused, removed, or done differently?

      3. What would a more manageable week actually look like for you — what would need to change?


Suggested actions

      - Highlight where there is additional capacity and work can be redistributed
      - Explicitly acknowledge pressures and why they are occurring
      - Clarify what can pause, stop or defer — reset expectations publicly

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Workload pressure is a leading driver of burnout, errors and turnover. This metric helps leaders spot unsustainable demand early, before it shows up as burnout, errors, or attrition.

Energy

Question - How energised does your current work make you feel?

Anchor Points - Energised | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not energised

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. What's been giving you energy or motivation in your work lately — and what's been draining it?

      2. Is there a skill or strength you feel like you're not getting to use enough right now?

      3. What's one thing we could protect or create space for that would help to boost energy?

Suggested actions

      - Protect space for energising work
      - Pause or rotate draining work
      - Play to strengths — look for opportunities to shift work toward people's areas of genuine interest and skill

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Energy is a leading indicator of sustainability. It reflects how work is landing on people — mentally and emotionally — not just how much work exists. Energy often declines before workload is rated as unmanageable and before engagement drops. Monitoring energy helps leaders detect emerging fatigue, burnout risk, and productivity drag early.


Supported

Question - How supported do you feel in managing your job demands right now?

Anchor Points - Supported | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not supported

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

1. Where have you felt well supported recently — by me, the team, or the organisation?

2. Is there something you're working through right now where you'd benefit from more help or visibility?

3. What's one thing I could do differently that would make you feel better supported right now?

Suggested actions
      - Increase check-ins during peak pressure
      - Encourage peer support as well as manager support
      - Make asking for help safe and visible

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Support buffers the impact of workload and change. Low support amplifies stress and risk even when demands are unchanged. 


Psychological Safety

Question - How safe do you feel to raise concerns or suggest ideas in your team?

Anchor Points - Safe | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not safe 

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Is there something you've been hesitant to raise in our team sessions — what's made it feel hard?

      2. Can you think of a time recently where you or someone else took a risk to speak up — how did that land?

      3. What would make it easier for everyone on the team to say what they're really thinking?

Suggested actions
      - Thank people for raising issues 
      - Model openness and fallibility 
      - Invite dissent explicitly (“What am I missing?”)

Info

 Why we recommend this metric:

Psychological safety enables learning, early risk identification and continuous improvement. Low safety is a precursor to silence, unresolved conflict and psychosocial harm. 


Connected

Question - How connected do you feel to your team right now? 

Anchor Points - Connected | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not connected

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Who on the team have you connected with well lately — and is there anyone you've felt a bit disconnected from

      2. What's something about a teammate's work or situation that you've recently learned that surprised or impressed you

      3. What's one thing we could do as a team to feel more like a team — especially for people who might be working more independently?

Suggested actions
      - Highlight and reinforce what’s worked well
      - Create regular moments for connection
      - Strengthen team rituals and identity
      - Check in on inclusion, not just output

Info

Why we recommend this metric:

Connectedness reflects belonging and cohesion. It is strongly linked to retention, resilience and discretionary effort. 


Respect

Question - How respectfully have people in your team been treating each other?

Anchor Points - Respectful | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not respectful

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

1. Can you share an example of someone on the team showing real respect or care recently — what did that look like?

2. Are there moments where you've felt spoken over, dismissed, or not heard — even if unintentionally?

3. Under pressure, what's one way our team sometimes slips in how we treat each other — and how could we catch it earlier?


Suggested actions

      - Highlight and reinforce examples of respectful behaviours 
      - Set clear expectations for how disagreement and challenge should show up
      - Address disrespectful behaviour early, calmly, and privately
      - Model respectful language, listening, and response under pressure

Info

Why we recommend this metric

Respect is a foundational condition for trust, safety, and effective collaboration. When respect erodes, teams experience higher conflict, withdrawal, and psychosocial risk, even if output remains high in the short term. 

Recognition

Question - How consistently are the positive contributions and achievements of others being recognised in your team?

Anchor Points - Consistently | Mostly | Somewhat | Not very | Not consistently

Manager Prompts:

Ask your team

      1. Who on the team has done something worth calling out recently that might not have been noticed?

      2. What kind of recognition means the most to you — how do you like to be acknowledged?

      3. Is there work happening in the team right now that's invisible or undervalued — how could we change that?


Suggested actions

      - Encourage peer-to-peer recognition

      - Create defined moments and rituals for recognition

      - Recognise behaviours as well as results

InfoWhy we recommend this metric:
Recognition reinforces positive behaviour, builds cohesion, and supports retention. Its absence undermines motivation even when other conditions are strong. This metric helps leaders understand whether contribution and effort are being noticed and reinforced fairly.

Why These Metrics Work

These Huddle metric recommendations are grounded in modern validated research and designed to deliver reliable, actionable insights for leaders; enabling earlier intervention, clearer accountability, and sustained improvement over time.
Best Practice Design Principles and Research Foundations Applied:
All Teamgage recommendations are grounded in best-practice survey science and proven research on team effectiveness, psychosocial safety, and risk management, and refined through Teamgage’s data and experience to support frequent, action-oriented insights.

1. Modern survey science:
Teamgage applies principles from decades of research into Employee Voice (Morrison, 2011)  which focuses on how, when and why people choose to speak up about work, alongside best-practice in questionnaire design synthesised by Imperial College London (Gehlbach & Brinkworth, 2011; Gelbach & Artino Jr., 2018), which draws on decades of empirical evidence (Krosnick & Presser, 2010; Scwarz, 1999).

Best practice design principles applied to Teamgage recommendations:
  1. Psychologically safe framing: Use neutral, non-judgemental language to avoid an "us vs them" mentality", this lowers perceived risk of speaking up and prompts more honest input.
  1. Behavioural or experiential framing: By focusing on lived experience rather than abstract opinion, this promotes more thoughtful responses.

  2. Action-linked intent: Questions that surface insights leaders can act on quickly, help reinforce the belief that speaking up leads to change.

  3. Question-based wording: This has been shown to reduce bias and cognitive effort compared to agree/disagree statements. 

  4. One construct per question: Preserves clarity and construct validity for reliable assessments.

  5. Short recall windows: Ensures results reflect current conditions for better visibility and monitoring of ongoing shifts and trends.

  6. Item specific, consistently labelled response scales: Improves response accuracy, interpretability and ease of response.

  7. Concise by design: Shorter surveys support sustained participation and data quality over time, which is critical for a continuous pulse measurement
These principles ensure insights remain valid, reliable, and usable when repeated regularly.

2. Team health and effectiveness research:
Recommendations for what areas to measure are informed by research into how teams work together, including Google's Project Aristotle, the GPRI model of team effectiveness, and Patrick Lencioni’s Five Dysfunctions of a Team. This research focuses on the most important shared, observable team conditions leaders can influence locally.

3. Psychosocial safety & risk management guidelines:
Recommendations also draw on research into Job Demands–Resources (JD-R), plus ISO 45003, and Australian WHS Managing Psychosocial Hazards Codes of Practice guidelines. This looks at the areas that are most important for early identification of emerging safety risks that shift quickly in team environments and can be influenced locally.

4. Applied validation through Teamgage:
All recommendations are refined using Teamgage's own longitudinal data across thousands of teams to identify questions that consistently drive insight, action, and sustained improvement. This ensures organisations can be confident their chosen Huddle metrics produce actionable insights and sustained engagement.

What these recommendations deliberately avoid:
  1. Broad attitudinal statements - e.g. “I am satisfied with my job”. These are slow to shift and offer little guidance for local action. 
  2. Composite or index questions - Combining multiple ideas into one score reduces clarity and actionability. 
  3. Agree / disagree statements - These increase cognitive load and response bias when used frequently. 
  4. Outcome or lagging measures - e.g. overall engagement, culture, or commitment scores. These are better suited to periodic diagnostics, not continuous monitoring
Instead, these recommendations prioritise observable conditions leaders and teams can influence in real time.

FAQ's

How often should we rotate Huddle metrics? 
Most organisations rotate 1–2 metrics every 1–3 months, or in response to a specific trigger such as:
  1. A change initiative or project
  2. Delivery pressure or peak workload
  3. Restructuring or team changes
Core metrics typically remain stable for longer periods, while rotational metrics are updated when their insight is no longer adding value. 

How many metrics is too many for a regular pulse? 
For regular use, 7 metrics per pulse is optimal. 
Research shows shorter surveys maintain participation, reduce cognitive load, and produce more reliable data when used frequently. Adding more questions rarely improves insight and often reduces data quality. 

Can different teams use different metrics? 
Yes. Teams may share the same core metrics but rotate different additional metrics depending on their context, risk profile, or priorities. 
This flexibility supports local relevance while maintaining organisational consistency where it matters. 

How do we choose which metrics should be core? 
Core metrics should:
  1. Reflect conditions that can shift week to week
  2. Be clearly actionable at team or leader level
  3. Are always relevant — regardless of strategy, structure, or operating model 

What if scores are consistently high? 
High scores are not a problem. They provide opportunities to:
  1. Highlight what’s working well
  2. Reinforce effective behaviours
  3. Capture practices worth sustaining or scaling 
Consistently high metrics still offer value when leaders actively reinforce success rather than moving on too quickly. 

What if feedback surfaces issues we can’t fix locally? 
Huddle helps surface issues early; not all issues need to be solved at team level. When challenges sit outside local control:
  1. Escalate patterns, not individual comments
  2. Use trends to inform leaders and decision-makers
  3. Acknowledge constraints openly while feeding back progress 
This transparency builds trust even when solutions take time. 

Who can help us design or review our metric mix? 
If you’d like help reviewing or adjusting your metric mix, contact support@teamgage.com or your dedicated Teamgage expert.