Get Started
← Back Sample Team Coaching Report Sample — not a real team

Team Motivation Profile — Coach Report

Alpha Product Team

TechWave Ltd · 6 members assessed

6
Members assessed
Growth · Work · Purpose
Collective top drivers
High
Recognition variance
22 Sep 2026
Report generated

Team Average Scores

Growth
74
The Work Itself
70
Purpose
65
Achievement
62
Ownership
48
Advancement
44
Recognition
42
Relatedness
38

The Alpha Product Team shows a Moderate collective spread with notable variance in Recognition and Advancement scores between members. The team is primarily united around learning, craft quality, and meaningful work — a strong foundation for a product-focused function. However, significant individual differences in how members seek recognition and career progression require careful one-to-one management.

Individual Member Profiles

Sarah Chen
Head of Product
Work 88 Growth 82 Purpose 78
Marcus Trent
Senior Engineer
Adv 82 Ach 79 Own 71
Priya Rao
Product Designer
Purpose 88 Work 80 Growth 74
James Liu
Engineering Lead
Growth 85 Own 72 Ach 68
Aiko Matsuda
Product Manager
Rec 78 Work 71 Purpose 65
David Kim
Data Analyst
Own 80 Ach 74 Growth 68

Team Dynamics Analysis

✓ Alignment — Growth & The Work Itself
Five of six members have Growth or The Work Itself in their top three drivers. This creates strong natural alignment around learning, craft quality, and intellectual challenge. Team conversations framed around “how do we do this better” and “what can we learn from this” will resonate across the group.
⚠ Divergence — Recognition (range: 28–78)
Recognition scores vary by 50 points across the team. Aiko (78) needs visible acknowledgement and public recognition. Sarah (42) and Priya (28) actively prefer private or no recognition. A blanket team-praise approach will frustrate half the team. Recognition should be delivered individually and calibrated to each person’s profile.
⚠ Divergence — Advancement (range: 22–82)
Marcus (82) is strongly advancement-driven and will be thinking about his next role and level of influence. David (22) has no interest in upward movement and is motivated purely by the quality of his work. These two world-views can create friction if advancement-focused conversations dominate team culture.
ⓘ Watch — Low collective Ownership (avg 48)
The team’s average Ownership score is below the midpoint. This may indicate that individuals feel they are executing tasks within someone else’s framework rather than owning outcomes. Clarifying who is genuinely accountable for each outcome — not just responsible for tasks — may resolve some of the team’s recent execution challenges.

Team Coaching Questions

“When our work as a team feels most energising, what conditions are usually present? What’s typically missing when energy is low?”
“Where does each of us feel genuinely accountable for an outcome — not just responsible for tasks? Where might that be unclear or missing?”
“How does recognition and acknowledgement work best for each of us? Where might our different needs create friction?”
“If we could redesign one aspect of how we work together to better reflect what motivates us, what would we change?”
Sample report — Motivation Drivers — motivationdrivers.com
This is a demonstration report. Real reports are generated from each team's actual assessment responses.