Understand how your team works.

It measures how each person on your team works — using the Big Five, a working-styles assessment and the Enneagram — and makes those measured profiles available inside Claude, ChatGPT or any assistant that speaks MCP.

So when you ask your assistant how to open a difficult conversation with a specific colleague, it answers about that colleague, citing what it read, instead of describing people in general.

Because the last one probably failed for two reasons, and both are structural rather than a matter of picking a better instrument.

It was about one person, and the expensive problems happen between people — no individual report can see friction that lives in neither profile on its own. And it was static: you cannot ask a PDF how any of it applies to the message you are about to send.

Throughline keeps the measurement and changes where it lives. The same insight is available mid-message rather than mid-workshop.

Managers who have to write the feedback, run the one-to-one and delegate the work. Teams who want to name a friction rather than live with it. People leaders rolling this out across an organisation with consent intact. And hiring teams, who use it after the decision rather than to make it.

It is built for people who have to defend the choice of instrument to somebody — which is why the reasoning is published rather than asserted.

Yes — one team of up to five people, indefinitely, with no card and no countdown. It's a real team, not a trial, so you can find out whether managers reach for it unprompted in week three, which is the only signal that matters.

They don't, and nothing about their working life changes. There is no shadow profile, no inference from their calendar or their writing, and no partial record. A colleague who opts out simply doesn't appear, and the assistant says so rather than guessing.

You only pay for tests that are actually taken, so opting out costs you nothing.

No. Throughline will not rank colleagues by ability, advise on promotions, or speculate beyond what was measured. Ask it to and it declines — by design. The Recruitment & Hiring plan gives hiring managers working-style guidance for candidates; it never scores them.

No — and it's the right question to ask. Paste your scores into an assistant and it will produce something fluent and plausible. It will also invent the parts it doesn't know, treat a two-point gap as a settled fact, and give you advice that would read identically for a colleague with the opposite profile.

Throughline supplies measured scores for real, consenting people, the relationship between any two of them, and rules about what may not be inferred. The assistant then reasons over facts instead of filling gaps with whatever sounds right.

Claude and ChatGPT out of the box, and anything that speaks MCP — including Cursor and Claude Code. Connecting takes about four minutes, once, and there's no new app to live in.