Three quick self-ratings per role — Skill, Energy, Attention — to surface fit, fatigue, and load.
On any role you hold, click the 3×3 dot grid to open the rating panel. Pick a level — 1, 2, or 3 — for each dimension. Takes about five seconds.
Your rating is visible to you and to anyone who can see the role (full rules: Who can see your data ). Each rating is stored as a timestamped snapshot, so you can see how you've evolved in the role over time. - — still building core competence
- — can do the work reliably
- — deep mastery; others come to you
Skill maps to Mihály Csíkszentmihályi's : a role feels good when skill and challenge balance. Far below what the role needs and you land in anxiety. Far above and you drift into boredom. Learning is useful signal — for coaches, for the person distributing work, and for the conversation about what's next.
- — I dread it; it costs me to do
- — I don't mind it, but it doesn't fill me up
- — I come alive doing this
Energy is the dimension most leaders forget to ask about. Jim Loehr and Tony Schwartz (The Power of Full Engagement) show that energy, not time, is the currency of sustained performance. Marcus Buckingham (Now, Discover Your Strengths, Love + Work) defines a strength as capability energy — not capability alone. A role you're skilled at but that drains you is a burnout risk. A role that energises you at Learning skill is a growth opportunity.
- — this role isn't getting what it needs from me
- — I'm stretched; the role is underserved
- — my attention matches the role's demands
Attention captures load. Every role-holder balances this role against every other role and every life thing. In , people don't just hold roles — they energise them. When a role isn't being energised, the organisation needs to know, so it can redistribute or resource differently. Peter Drucker makes the same point in Managing Oneself: the scarce resource isn't time, it's attention.
We looked at longer frameworks — purpose, values, 360s, competency matrices — and chose to keep this short. Three dimensions, three levels, five seconds. The Japanese concept of Ikigai maps onto them well. The aim is a shared vocabulary, updated often enough to stay true. Combinations carry the signal:
Different questions, different answers.
You (and, soon, your team lead)
1–3 on Skill, Energy, Attention
A time-bounded round you initiate
Self-signal of fit, role by role
Outside view of how you collaborate
Read together they tell a fuller story than either alone.
Only the role-holder rates themselves. Peers and managers can see ratings but can't edit them.
Team leads will be able to offer their own perspective on role fit for people on their team. If you rate yourself Expert / Energises me and your lead rates the same role Capable / Drains you, that's a conversation worth having. Both views will be shown side by side and clearly attributed.
If your workspace is connected via MCP , you can ask things like "Who rates their energy as 'Drains' on multiple roles?" or "For everyone in the People team, show their role-fit ratings alongside their most recent 360 feedback." The AI sees the same data you would. - Mihály Csíkszentmihályi — Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience ( overview )
- Jim Loehr & Tony Schwartz — The Power of Full Engagement ( HBR summary )
- Marcus Buckingham & Donald Clifton — Now, Discover Your Strengths
- Peter Drucker — Managing Oneself (HBR, 1999)
- Brian Robertson — Holacracy: The New Management System ( holacracy.org )