A suite of research-validated diagnostic instruments drawn from established frameworks in organisational learning, training evaluation, and team science. Each tool generates scored reports with prioritised recommendations.
These are demonstration instruments and are not intended for use in formal Monitoring & Evaluation work without appropriate validation and context. Content licensed under CC BY-SA-NC. Commercial use may require engagement with both IEISI and the relevant third-party framework owners — contact [email protected] to discuss.Each instrument is grounded in peer-reviewed research with documented reliability and validity evidence. They are designed to surface actionable gaps across individual, team, and organisational levels of a learning system.
The most widely validated learning organisation survey available. The DLOQ measures seven actionable dimensions of organisational learning at individual, team, and system levels. It has been validated across more than fifteen countries with reliability coefficients consistently above 0.84, and is used in organisational research, leadership development, and strategic capability reviews.
A 60-item diagnostic that maps organisational learning maturity against the combined evaluation frameworks of Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Model and Kaufman's Five-Level Evaluation Framework. It assesses the full chain from learner reaction through to broader societal impact, making it suitable for organisations that need to audit their evaluation culture and evidence practices.
The LTSI diagnoses the conditions that enable or inhibit transfer of learning from training back to the workplace. It assesses 16 factors across four domains — individual readiness, social support, training design, and organisational environment — and generates a transfer readiness score along with targeted interventions. Particularly useful for post-training reviews and learning transfer planning.
An assessment of team performance grounded in Hackman's Team Effectiveness Model and the findings from Google's Project Aristotle — the largest empirical study of what makes teams effective. It measures six dimensions that research consistently identifies as predictive of team outcomes, and is designed for use by teams seeking to understand their own dynamics and prioritise development areas.
These instruments are not proprietary surveys. They are digital implementations of frameworks that have been refined through peer-reviewed research and applied in contexts from multinational organisations to government agencies and international development programmes.
"The most powerful diagnostic is one that connects individual experience to systemic conditions — and gives people a language for the gap."
Developed at Teachers College, Columbia University. One of the most cited learning organisation instruments in the literature, with validation studies spanning Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and the Pacific.
Kirkpatrick's four-level model has been the dominant evaluation framework in professional training since 1959. Kaufman's extension adds a fifth level — societal impact — which is particularly relevant in development and public-sector contexts.
The LTSI emerged from transfer of training research at Louisiana State University. It operationalises the variables most predictive of whether learning makes it back to the job — and what gets in the way.
J. Richard Hackman's research at Harvard identified the structural and social conditions that determine team effectiveness. His model predicts outcomes more reliably than measures of individual talent or effort alone.
A multi-year internal study by Google People Analytics examined hundreds of teams and found psychological safety to be the single strongest predictor of team effectiveness — validating and extending Hackman's theoretical framework with large-scale empirical data.
All instruments are published under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike-NonCommercial. Commercial use may require engagement with both IEISI and the relevant third-party framework owners, depending on the instrument and context. Contact [email protected] to discuss.