A facilitated team session
Most team problems are not people problems.
They are composition problems. The same two people will hit the same friction every quarter until somebody names it. We map how your team is actually built, tell you where it will bind, and hand you the remedies.
We’ll have a short conversation first — about your team and what keeps happening. Nothing is committed until we both think this is the right thing for it.
How it runs
Two sessions, a week apart, and the week is not padding.
Most workshops happen in one block, everyone nods, and nothing survives contact with the following Monday. The gap is what makes this stick.
Everyone takes the assessment
Ten situations each, about three minutes. No preparation, no homework, and nothing for you to organise beyond sharing one link.
How this team is actually built
We walk the team through the composition — who leads with what, where the mix is concentrated, and which stages of the work have nobody naturally minding them. Then the pairings that matter most, named and explained.
The team notices it in the wild
This gap is deliberate and it is where most of the value lands. People spend the week recognising the patterns in real meetings, which is what turns a model into something they actually use.
What to do about it
We work the friction points the team hit that week, apply the specific remedies, and leave with commitments that have names attached rather than good intentions.
What you keep
You are not buying a workshop. You are buying what survives it.
The sessions are where it lands. The report is what the team still has in six months, and what a new joiner reads to understand how this group works.
- A written team report — composition, gaps, and the pairings that will bind
- Every individual profile, with named blind spots
- The specific remedy for each friction point, not general advice
- A shared vocabulary the team keeps using after we have gone
- Yours to keep, share and re-read. No licence, no per-seat fee, no expiry.
Who runs the session
I’m Nic. I run these myself.
There is no bench and no associate network, so the person you have the first conversation with is the person in the room.
I have been using this model with my own teams for about ten years. Some of that was explicit — everyone mapped, the vocabulary in use, the mix looked at again whenever somebody joined. Most of it was quieter: a lens I was applying in hiring interviews, in onboarding, in development plans, and in the ordinary business of trying to run a team that worked, without ever saying out loud what I was doing.
In 2020 another lead and I were told to take a team of about twenty-five past fifty, with roughly a month to do the hiring. Four interviews a day. The work itself was not exotic, so finding people who could do it was the easy part — what we were actually deciding, over and over, was what the culture would be on the other side, and we knew it. So we stopped hiring for skills. We were hiring for the pieces the team did not have. Every interview carried questions that let us place a candidate on the model, which meant we could see where we were over-subscribing to one type before the offers went out rather than a quarter later. It earned its keep again at onboarding, when we grouped the new starters by mix rather than by start date. A lot of them are running teams of their own now.
I have been using this for ten years. Kaltcha — the company, the website, the thing you can actually buy — is new. I am building it around a system that already worked rather than the other way round, and I would rather say that plainly than let a website imply a client list I do not have yet.
Nic Scott
Why this one
Most team assessments end with a report. That is where the problem starts.
The standard shape is a day out, a document, and a set of labels people quote at each other for a fortnight. Nothing is different by the next quarter, because nothing was designed to be.
The usual shape
- One session, one report, and it is over
- Tells you what each person is
- Nothing to check against between the day and the next quarter
- The labels outlive the insight
- Re-run it in two years when the team has changed anyway
What we do instead
- Two sessions with a week between — the team tests it against real meetings before we come back
- Shows the team where it meshes and where it grinds, and the specific thing to change
- Commitments with names attached, worked in session two rather than listed in a document
- A shared vocabulary that keeps working — the model stays useful as people join and roles shift
- Re-runnable by the team itself. The assessment is free and always will be, so a new joiner is mapped in three minutes without buying anything
The point is not a better report. It is that the team keeps using this after we have gone — which is also why the assessment underneath it stays free rather than being the thing we sell.
Ten years of use, not a launch
Grounded in Hackman’s conditions for team effectiveness, and run with real teams for a decade before it was ever software.
No accreditation needed
Nobody on your side has to be certified to keep using it, and there is no per-report fee when someone new joins.
Never sent to an AI
Your team’s answers never leave our system and are never sent to a language model. Every word was written by us.
What it costs
€1,500 for the team, not per person.
- Half-day team-roles workshop, 10 people
- €1,750–2,350
- Individual reports, per head on top
- €60–70
- So, all in for a team of ten
- €2,350–3,050
- Kaltcha — two sessions, up to 10, reports included
- €1,500
Published market rates for comparable workshops, mid-2026, converted to euros. Indicative, not quotes.
Invoiced, payable on completion. No subscription, no per-seat licence, and nothing that renews without you noticing.
Book a session- What happens when I get in touch?
- We reply, and we have a short conversation — a call or a few emails, whichever you prefer — about the team and what keeps happening in it. Nothing is booked or invoiced from that. If it is not the right thing for your situation we will say so, because a session run on the wrong problem helps nobody and we would rather not take the money.
- How many people can take part?
- Up to ten. Beyond that the relational work stops being useful in one room, so a larger group runs as two cohorts — and we will say so before you book rather than after.
- Do we need to prepare anything?
- No. Everyone takes a three-minute assessment beforehand. That is the whole ask.
- Is this online or in person?
- Online by default, hosted on your own video platform. It keeps the price down and means a distributed team joins on equal footing rather than half a room and half a screen. In person is available where it genuinely suits the team — it costs more, because it is a full day plus travel, and we will quote it honestly rather than bundling it in.
- What if the team is sceptical about personality tests?
- Good — the sceptics usually get the most out of it. This is not a test that sorts people into boxes and stops. It describes what predictably happens between two specific people, which is checkable against their own experience. If it does not match, they will say so, and that is a useful session too.
- What happens to our data?
- It stays with us and is never sent to an AI. Every profile was written in advance by a human, so the same answers always produce the same result.
Tell us about your team.
A couple of lines about the team and what keeps happening is enough to start. We will have a short conversation before anything is booked, and we will tell you honestly if this is not the right thing for it.