Capacity
Same output. Fewer people.
Positions go unfilled, teams shrink, while at the same time demands, projects and expected results keep rising. Many teams already work at the limit of what they can carry, and still more is added on top.
Diagnosis · Organizational Effectiveness Assessment
See where your organization loses productivity.
The Organizational Effectiveness Assessment is prosma's productivity and organizational diagnosis for collaboration, leadership, processes and digital work. It shows where work loses time, capacity and results, which causes lie behind this and which measures now have the greatest leverage.
9 assessment fields
Multi-method diagnosis
Prioritized roadmap
Sound familiar?
Much invested. A lot of activity.
Too little result.
Hybrid models, M365, new meeting formats, AI pilots, leadership training: most organizations have introduced a great deal in recent years. The decisive question is no longer whether the initiatives exist. It is whether they save time in daily work, speed up decisions and free up capacity. Because the pressure is rising: a larger volume of work has to be handled with a shrinking workforce.
Governance
Decisions take too long.
Responsibilities and escalation paths are not clear enough. Topics travel through meetings without ever being decided with commitment. The calendars are full; the progress is not.
Technology
Tools and AI are here. It doesn't feel more productive.
Teams, SharePoint, Planner, Copilot: the infrastructure is in place, but depth of use, clear use cases and measurable relief are missing. AI exists as an initiative, not as an effect.
Workload
The workload keeps rising with no relief in sight.
Meeting load, context switching, constant availability. Everyone feels the exhaustion, but no one can cleanly name which organizational lever should be addressed first.
Our promise: We identify the biggest productivity and efficiency losses in your organization and point to the most effective levers. On request, we support the implementation and make sure that potential turns into measurable results. That way you achieve more with the same or shrinking resources.
The method
Four data sources.
One robust picture.
Not a mere survey, not gut feeling: the assessment triangulates several data-collection methods. Where findings converge, confidence rises. Where they contradict each other, we flag it instead of smoothing it over.
Factual basis
System data
Existing data from Teams, Outlook and other systems, aggregated in a GDPR-compliant way. Facts instead of self-reporting.
Breadth
Standardized survey
An anonymized employee survey with scientifically grounded items, including established validated scales.
Depth
Interviews & focus groups
Qualitative deep dives where answers need context: sensitive topics, leadership perspectives, team norms.
Reality
Observation
Optional meeting observation and shadowing. Shows the practice rather than the self-image, used selectively as a deep-dive module.
The approach draws on 20 years of consulting experience in Modern Work and organizational development, including work with Atruvia and 250+ organizations of the cooperative FinanzGruppe.
Selected references
Volks- und Raiffeisenbanken
Way2DigitalWork
Volks- und Raiffeisenbanken
Way2DigitalWork
The core
Nine fields.
One complete picture.
Organizations rarely lose productivity in a single place. That is why the assessment looks at the entire architecture of work: from strategy translation to cultural norms. The breadth is the diagnostic advantage. The result is focused: prioritized fields of action instead of nine parallel construction sites.
Strategy & strategic alignment
Does the strategy land in everyday work? We check whether goals, priorities and projects contribute to a shared understanding.
Strategy understandingGoal cascadeStrategy stability
Decisions, accountability & processes
Who is allowed to decide what? We analyze decision paths, roles and escalation logic so teams can act without constant alignment.
Decision clarityRole clarityEscalation structure
Communication, information flow & meeting culture
Which meetings create impact, which only effort? We measure information flow, channel usage and meeting load.
Meeting qualityInformation flowResponse pressure
Leadership behavior & team development
Leadership as observable practice: feedback, focus protection and safety in the team, evaluated separately for leaders and team members.
Feedback & developmentPsychological safetyHybrid equity
Digital & physical work infrastructure
Do tools, storage systems and workplaces support the actual work? Or do they create friction, search effort and workarounds?
Tool availabilityKnowledge managementOffice concept
Automation, AI & technological efficiency
Where do AI and automation create real relief, and where do they exist only as an initiative? The basis for your AI roadmap.
AI adoption depthDegree of automationMedia breaks
Working-time design & workload
Can people work with focus? We measure focus time, fragmentation, availability norms and workload patterns.
FragmentationAvailability expectationSwitching off after work
Enablement & skills development
Are new ways of working actually learned? We check the learning system, onboarding and leadership's change capability.
Learning systemOnboardingChange capability
Readiness for change & cultural norms
Do the lived norms foster change, or block it? We make the gap between aspiration and practice visible.
Error cultureKnowledge sharingOpenness to change
Each field is operationalized into dimensions with defined constructs and items. The choice of data-collection method is made per dimension, not across the board. The assessment does not evaluate individuals: it analyzes structures, patterns and working conditions, anonymized and role-based.
Plain talk
What the assessment is.
And what it isn't.
What it is
- A structured organizational diagnosis of the central productivity and relief levers of modern work
- A status assessment for collaboration, leadership, processes and digital productivity
- A multi-method approach combining survey, system data, interviews and optional observation
- A prioritization instrument: which measure takes effect first
- A relief diagnosis for organizations with rising demands and scarce capacity
- A decision basis that management, HR, IT and department heads can use together
What it isn't
- Yet another employee survey
- A satisfaction barometer
- A tool audit or M365 training
- A culture workshop
- An individual performance appraisal
- A purely HR instrument
- An efficiency program that demands more output without structural relief
- A "we'll find a problem no matter what" format
Who it's for
Accountable for results, but without additional resources
The assessment is aimed at people who are accountable for the productivity and delivery capability of their organization and want to know where the biggest lever lies before the next measure starts.
Sound familiar?
It's a fit if...
- Complex knowledge work across several teams, divisions or locations
- High meeting and alignment load, little focus time
- M365 environment in place, but used inconsistently
- Noticeable efficiency, cost or delivery pressure
- Job cuts, hiring freeze or unfilled roles
- A need for transformation, but no shared data basis
- From mid-sized companies to corporations: tailored to company size, industry and individual processes
- Most effective when carried jointly with operational leadership, not commissioned by HR alone
The process
From scoping to roadmap
The assessment scales modularly, from a compact entry point to a deep diagnosis with observation modules. We define the scope together, matched to your area, question and budget.
Scoping
Scope & goalsWhich area is examined, which questions should be answered, which data sources are available? This is where the scope of the assessment takes shape.
Data collection
Survey & system dataAn anonymized standardized survey plus analysis of existing system and process data. Low effort for your organization, maximum factual basis.
Qualitative deep dive
Interviews & focus groupsTargeted deep dives where the data raises questions: one-on-one interviews, focus groups, optionally meeting observation and shadowing.
Findings & prioritization
TriangulationBringing all data sources together into a result profile across the nine fields: what is strong, what has room to develop, what is critical. Clear and to the point.
Roadmap workshop
From finding to measureJoint prioritization of the fields of action: quick wins, structural levers and an implementation roadmap that fits your organization.
Results
What is on the table at the end
Not a mood snapshot, not an abstract analysis: the assessment ends with a clear chain of diagnosis, prioritization and implementation.
Diagnosis
Where you stand today
- A status assessment of productivity losses, friction points and relief levers
- A result and maturity profile across the nine assessment fields
Prioritization
What works first
- Prioritized fields of action
- Concrete quick wins
- Structural development levers
Implementation
What happens next
- A catalog of measures with recommendations
- An implementation roadmap
- A decision basis for the next steps
Optional
Review assessment
Measures the impact of the implemented actions at a later point.
How the findings become tangible
Four visualizations, built for decisions instead of abstraction: for a quick overview, the comparison across areas, prioritization and the capacity question.
Overview
Radar profile
Strengths and development fields at a glance, across all nine assessment fields.
Comparison
Heatmap
Shows which areas, teams or locations the friction actually sits in.
Prioritization
Impact matrix
Impact potential against implementation effort: the basis for the order of measures.
Capacity
Relief map
Shows concretely where time and capacity are freed up in everyday work.
The results are prepared so that management, department heads, HR/OD and IT can work from the same data basis, instead of four different perceptions.
Common objections
Fair questions, honest answers
Isn't this just another employee survey?
No. The survey is only one of four data sources. The assessment combines quantitative data collection, existing system data, qualitative deep dives and optional observation. It is precisely the combination that separates a mood snapshot from a robust finding.
We actually already know where our problems lie.
Often the symptoms are visible, but the causes and priorities are unclear. The assessment separates gut feeling from robust findings and shows which lever produces an effect first. If your hypotheses are confirmed, you then have the data basis to act on them.
Will leaders perceive this as control?
The assessment does not evaluate individuals. It makes structural patterns visible and works with anonymized findings by role and area. The goal is not control, but more effective collaboration. That is exactly what we communicate into your organization as well.
We don't need analysis, we need implementation.
Implementation without diagnosis quickly produces activity, but not necessarily impact. The assessment shortens the path to the right implementation: it does not end with insights, but with prioritized fields of action and concrete follow-up measures.
We know we're short on people. We don't need an assessment for that.
The assessment does not replace a capacity decision. But it shows which work is currently tied up by friction, duplicated effort, unclear decisions, poor information flows or unused automation, and where relief realistically arises.
Doesn't this sound like an efficiency program and extra pressure on employees?
The focus is not on more output through more pressure, but on structural relief: less friction, clearer priorities, better decisions, more effective tools and targeted automation. The assessment does not evaluate individuals and measures no one by extra work.
Isn't this too broad? We need one concrete lever.
The breadth is the diagnostic advantage: productivity losses arise from the interplay of several fields. The result is focused. It produces prioritized fields of action, not nine parallel construction sites.
We're already in the middle of a transformation.
Then the assessment is especially worthwhile: it creates clarity about where the transformation lands in everyday work and where it creates friction. The findings connect to ongoing initiatives from HR, IT and organizational development.