Org alignment workbench

Every piece can look reasonable on its own and the organization still doesn't work, because the pieces don't fit each other. Describe Work, People, Formal structure, and Informal structure, then rate the fit across all 6 pairs - built on the Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model.

  • 4 elements, 6 pairwise fits
  • No account or server upload required
What situation are you looking at?

Name it specifically - a team, a rollout, a recurring friction point. Everything below is evaluated against this one situation.

Describe each element as it actually is

What does the work actually require, day to day?

The tasks themselves and what doing them well takes - not the org chart, the actual work.

Who is doing the work, and what do they need to do it well?

Skills and capacity, and what would help them perform - not a roster, a real read on fit.

How is this officially organized - reporting lines, process, incentives?

The stated, written-down structure: who reports to whom, how decisions are officially made.

What actually happens, regardless of what's official?

Unwritten norms and real behavior patterns - what people have actually learned happens in practice.

Rate the fit between each pair

Work × People

Does the work genuinely fit what your people are equipped and positioned to do?

Work × Formal structure

Does the formal structure actually support how the work really gets done?

Work × Informal structure

Do real day-to-day norms help the work, or quietly undercut it?

People × Formal structure

Does the formal structure - roles, incentives - actually fit who's doing the work?

People × Informal structure

Do unwritten norms support your people, or work against them?

Formal × Informal structure

Does what actually happens match what the formal structure says should happen?

0 of 4 elements described, 0 of 6 pairs rated

No account or server upload is required. Your answers stay in this browser unless you clear them.

Your alignment readout appears here once the situation, all 4 elements, and all 6 pairs are filled in.

How this works

The Congruence Model's claim isn't that each element needs to be individually excellent - it's that misalignment between any two produces friction, regardless of how good each one looks in isolation. Rate each of the 6 pairs as a good fit, some friction, or a real mismatch, and the readout groups them by severity with a suggested place to start - whichever element shows up in the most real mismatches, disclosed directly rather than picked arbitrarily if it's a tie.

Frequently asked questions

Is this the same as the Congruence Model consulting firms use?

It applies the same public model - developed by David Nadler and Michael Tushman, not proprietary to any consulting firm - but the questions, ratings, and write-up here are original, not adapted from any firm's internal materials.

Will I get an alignment score?

No. Each of the 6 pairs gets a fit rating - good fit, some friction, or real mismatch - grouped into a readout with a suggested starting point, never a numeric score.

What if two elements are tied for the most mismatches?

Both are named directly rather than picking one arbitrarily - a tie is real information, not something to hide behind a single answer.

Is anything saved on MBA Lab's servers?

No account or server upload is required. Your answers stay in this browser unless you clear them yourself.

Go deeper

The Congruence Model, explained Read the full framework Change and AI readiness assessment Check readiness for a specific rollout Symptom versus root cause A complementary diagnostic lens All free tools Browse the full list

Ready to plan the fix itself?

MBA Lab keeps your team's projects, tasks, deadlines, and deliverables in one place - free to start.

Get started