Move AI adoption forward with the people you already have.
If you are the one driving AI adoption inside your company, the hard questions usually turn out to be about people. Who takes this on? Why has that person never touched it? RELACTIS gives you material to answer with. A 24-question assessment, about four minutes per person, makes visible how each member relates to AI, then carries that through to role-by-role distributions and team lineups you can build from the members you already have. It does not assume new hires or outside recruiting.
Why AI adoption doesn't spread across the organisation.
- 01
AI use is concentrated in a handful of people
- 02
Training happens, but nothing sticks in daily work
- 03
Adoption varies widely between teams
- 04
No shared idea of how to use AI as a team
- 05
Managers and culture quietly stall it
- 06
Individual workarounds never become shared knowledge
- 07
After rollout, the next move isn't clear
Stop treating AI adoption as a matter of individual effort or talent. Treat the relationship between people and AI as an organisation-development topic, and AI use shifts from private workarounds to organisational capability.
What we deliver, in the end, is a team lineup.
RELACTIS is not a tool for measuring who can use AI: it is a tool for working out how to combine the people you already have so that your organization gets the most out of AI. Everything on this page stands on that one sentence.
Each person who takes it gets a result showing which of the 15 types they are closest to (when the answers do not settle on a type, the result comes back as inconclusive). For a company rollout, though, we believe the most valuable output is not the type names. It is what appears when role-by-role differences in traits are converted into team lineups. The person who finds new uses for AI and the person who runs them every day often sit in separate roles, and that kind of poor meshing never shows up while you read individual results one at a time.
We do not recommend the playbook of finding your strongest AI user and handing everything to them. Work that gathers around one capable person is work that stops the day that person transfers out.
When you explain the spend internally, you can say it straight: "This is an investment in re-deciding who handles what, with the team we already have, before we talk about hiring."
Same people, different lineup, different pace.
When the whole team takes it, the distribution by role and by type comes together on one page. The organization report then adds recommended team lineups: specify a purpose and a headcount, and you get three options optimized for fit to purpose, phase momentum and type coverage.
The ranking has one deliberate quirk. An option filled with the same people as the one before it drops down the list, because showing you the same core three times would leave nothing to choose between. Compare the three and you start to see who is genuinely hard to take out, and which roles turn out to run fine with somebody else. Which option to adopt stays your decision.
The team view scores a lineup in four parts (fit to purpose, phase momentum, internal chemistry, and resilience to risk) because a single total gives you nowhere to act next. Change the purpose and the same faces score differently: a lineup for launching a new business is weighted toward creation and advocacy, while one for consolidating quality puts verification first.
An individual result carries a second face alongside the top type. Counted together as composite types, they show the three pairings most common in your organization, and the report includes that list. It is a design that avoids pinning a person under a single label.
In an organization that runs the survey anonymously, the lineups stay anonymous too. No output ever says to pair this named person with that one. The report designs the shape of the team; whose name goes into each seat stays with the people who know the floor. If anyone inside worries that results will leak into evaluations, you can show them this design as it stands.
What a team rollout hands you
After the combining, some places stay empty.
Build the lineups and sometimes a role stays unfilled in every option. On the matrix that crosses roles with types, it appears as a cell with nobody in it. We call these cells blank zones.
The order matters to us. The primary output is the lineup; the blank zone, which shows who your organization currently lacks, is the secondary output that becomes visible as a result. Go looking for missing people first and the answers drift toward hiring and outsourcing. Draw the lineups first and you usually find that the people already there cover more roles than expected.
A blank cell does not turn into a hiring plan on the spot. With a small headcount, a zero can appear by chance alone: a department of seven showing zero of some type is no proof that the type is absent. So we treat blank zones as the next place to check rather than as a conclusion.
If this comes up in the approval process, you can answer it as is: "If a blank zone appears, verification comes first. It does not become a headcount request in the room."
From assessment to dialogue, on the same day.
The entry point is the free individual assessment. Taken as a team, it produces the distribution and the lineup options; a workshop turns those into dialogue, and the dialogue feeds a 90-day practice design. The stages are separable, so you can try the assessment alone and decide there whether to continue.
The smallest unit of training
Our training is built from a 60-minute module. It opens with a short piece of theory on why roles differ from person to person, and then everyone takes the assessment right there: about four minutes, a phone is enough. The tally finishes during the break, and the second half is dialogue over your own organization's distribution. The material that carries the session is the distribution your own room produced minutes earlier, more than any slide. The module is sequenced this way so people leave the same day with an answer to what they, personally, will do next.
We decide what we will not do, first.
There are no numbers on this page promising an outcome. We have decided that evidence we do not hold does not get published. In its place are four fixed rules for how we work.
In most approval processes, the first rule is where the worry sits. Being able to answer that it was settled in advance changes how much the participants cooperate.
AI Assessment: The entry point for every relationship.
RELACTIS makes AI collaboration visible through 15 patterns. But these are not labels that define you — they are hypotheses for understanding yourself and your team. From the result, we move into dialogue, experiments and reflection, turning insight into organisational change.
Make your relationship with AI and teammates visible and discussable.
Connect the result to workplace experiments and 30/60/90-day action design.
Turn individual change into a shared team language that settles into the organisation.
No one is a single type
How you work with AI shifts with role, context, experience and environment. RELACTIS captures your collaboration style and possibilities as they are now.
Difference is a resource, not a problem
People who generate, organise, test, systemise and spread. When those differences become visible and combinable, AI adoption moves forward.
A result is an entry point, not a verdict
Results are not labels for evaluating people. They are hypotheses for starting a conversation.
Change comes from practice, not understanding
Knowing doesn't change an organisation. Designing the loop of dialogue, trial, learning and improvement is where RELACTIS adds value.
Free to take. Go deeper with a paid plan.
The individual diagnosis is always free. Annual billing includes 2 months free.
Track change, dig deeper
- ✓Full history
- ✓Previous vs current comparison
- ✓Deep-dive AI coach & learning plan
- ✓PDF report export
For organizations starting AX
- ✓Up to 30 members
- ✓Organization survey & distribution report
- ✓AI org report + PDF
- ✓Team builder + Team Studio
- ✓Round management
Round trends, large orgs, priority support
- ✓Everything in Team
- ✓Custom member / round limits
- ✓Multi-org / department management
- ✓Onboarding, dedicated support & invoicing
During a support program (Start / Shift / Enterprise), Team / Business usage is included in the program fee.
Start from the combination you already have.
When you get in touch, tell us two things: roughly how many people are involved, and where AI adoption is currently stuck. With those we can come back with an approach and a rough estimate. If you would rather get a feel for it first, the fastest route is to take the free individual assessment yourself. Look at what comes back in about four minutes, then decide whether to bring it to your team.