Storming shows how your team actually decides, argues and delivers. And turns friction into agreements.
No report, no colour cards, no type per person: Storming uses open, scientifically established instruments to measure where working styles and expectations in your team pull apart — and proposes what to agree on, concretely, on Monday.
For leads with five to fifteen people on the team. Twenty minutes per person, then a conversation that produces an agreement instead of an insight.
The product is in development. Beta later in 2026, starting with the teams on the waitlist.
What a finding looks like
Two people, one rule, one proposal. No report, no workshop, no label. What follows is a complete output of the application — there is nothing more. It is visible only to the two people involved, and only after both have consented.
- What you would see
- Marc considers a task done when it works. Anna, when it is written down and checked. Both have redone work the other considered finished.
- Based on
- Orderliness Δ 34 points · intervals do not overlap
- Proposal
- Before work starts, write down what “done” means per artefact — ticket, migration, runbook.
Why your team will take part
The most common reason tools like this fail is not the method. It is the suspicion that, in the end, someone is keeping a file on you.
Here, a profile belongs to the person who filled it in. As a lead you see nothing until someone shares it — named, time-boxed, revocable at any time. Declining leaves no visible gap.
That sounds like less control. In practice it is why people answer honestly — and honest answers are the only thing a useful picture can be built from.