Team Dynamic Labs

Instruments

Each one answers a different question about how a team works.

They share an account, a team, and a language. Nothing else. Lifecycle is shown, not hidden: a planned instrument is listed so you can decide whether to wait for it.

  • Styles

    Available now

    A four-quadrant behavioural model built on two axes, assertiveness and responsiveness.

    The question it answers: How do we each come across, and where will that rub? Two axes of observable behavior, how much you assert and how much you show, place each person in one of four styles: Analytical, Driver, Expressive, Amiable. It describes what colleagues can see, not what you are like inside, which is why people accept it quickly and argue with it rarely.

    Best when

    • A team needs a shared vocabulary for how it works, in an hour, without a facilitator.
    • Two people keep grinding and neither can say why. The pairing guide says why, and what to do.
    • A new lead, a merged team, or a new hire onto an existing grid. The map is the onboarding.
    • Anyone whose job is adapting to other people: managers, sales, client-facing roles. Adapting is the whole point of the model.

    Not the right tool when

    • You want to know what motivates someone, how they behave under pressure, or what they are good at. It measures none of those.
    • You are deciding who to hire or promote. Never, for any instrument here.

    Builds on the four-quadrant behavioral tradition begun by David Merrill and Roger Reid in the 1960s. Items and guidance are original; no affiliation with any other provider.

    Take itCompare any two styles
    Tells you
    Your style, your blend, and how each pairing on the team will click or grind
    Unit
    The team. Individual results first, then everyone on one grid
    Takes
    About five minutes, 28 prompts, no prep
    Priced
    Free for a team of six; one price per team from the seventh person
    Evidence
    A well-established model, in workplace use since the 1970s
    Rater
    Self-report today; the original model was built on how others see you

  • DISC

    Planned

    A four-factor behavioural profile widely used in hiring and coaching, offered here for teams that already speak it.

    The question it answers: What drives how I behave, and how do I shift when the situation changes? Four factors, Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Conscientiousness, from a theory William Marston published in 1928. Where Styles reads how you come across, DISC is a self-report of your tendencies: what you push for, what you avoid, and how your behavior in the role differs from your behavior at rest.

    Best when

    • Your organization, or your client’s, already speaks DISC. It is the most widely used four-factor vocabulary at work, and a second language on top of it costs more than it returns.
    • You want depth on one person rather than a map of the team: motivations, stressors, and the gap between natural and adapted behavior.
    • Sales and customer-facing coaching, where the DISC practice literature is deepest.
    • The team wants a second lens on the same people. The four DISC factors rhyme with the four styles, but they do not map one to one, and the differences are where the conversation is.

    Not the right tool when

    • You need the team on one grid in an hour. Styles does that; DISC is a profile per person.
    • You need a validated predictor of performance. Independent evidence for DISC’s predictive validity is thin, and we will not pretend otherwise.
    • Hiring or promotion. Never.

    Our DISC items and guidance will be original work on Marston’s public model. No affiliation with any DISC publisher.

    Join the list
    Tells you
    Your dominant factors, what drives and drains you, and how your role behavior differs from your natural one
    Unit
    The individual, with a team view as a second step
    Takes
    About 30 minutes
    Priced
    Prepaid credits, one per participant
    Evidence
    Widely used; reliable as a communication-style tool; predictive validity not demonstrated
    Rater
    Self-report

Which one

Start with the question you are actually asking.

You are askingUseBecause
Why do we keep clashing?Team Dynamic StylesIt puts the whole team on one grid and hands you a guide for the pairing that is grinding.
How do people experience working with me?360 feedbackOnly the people around you can answer that. The instrument is a structured way to ask them, and a loop to follow up.
What drives me, and how do I shift under pressure?DISCIt is a self-report of tendencies and adaptation, with a vocabulary your organization may already use.
What should this person work on next, with this team?360, on a team that has taken StylesThe 360 says what needs work. The team’s styles say what better looks like with these colleagues. That feeds the rehearsal.

For self-awareness and team development only — not for hiring, promotion, or clinical decisions. Where an instrument is co-developed with a partner, the credit appears on its page.