The AI Adoption Sentiment Pulse

Most of what The GAiGE measures is about the tools: what they saved, what they cost, whether they're worth keeping. This pulse is about the people. It measures how AI adoption feels across your organisation, which is a different question from how any one tool performs, and it's the question that decides how the rest of the programme is received.

It's also a different job from The AI Capability Check. Capability asks "can you do your job with these tools", tool by tool. Sentiment asks "how does the whole thing feel": the pace, the support, and where help would make the most difference.

This article covers what it asks, who receives it, and how to read the report.

What it asks

Five questions, well under a minute:

Pace. How the pace of AI adoption feels: too fast, about right, too slow, or "it doesn't feel planned". That last option matters: a team that finds the pace fine but the plan invisible needs communication, not a slower rollout.
Positivity. How positive they feel about the way you're using AI, on a 1-10 slider.
Support. When a tool changes how they work, how supported they feel, from "well supported" to "unsupported".
Where help would make the most difference. Knowing which tool to use for what, getting better results from the tools they have, understanding what's allowed, or "nothing, I'm set".
An optional comment for leadership, in their own words, like every library pulse, the questions are locked so the trend holds up month to month; the schedule, delivery window and colour are yours to set.

Who receives it, and when

Everyone. The pulse is org-wide rather than tool-specific, so it goes to every member of your organisation, including people who aren't assigned to any tool yet. That's deliberate: the people no tool has reached are often the ones with the most to say about pace and support, and a sentiment read that skips them would flatter the programme.

Monthly by default. Sentiment moves slowly, and asking more often measures survey fatigue rather than adoption. It arrives in the browser on its schedule like every other pulse, and it's skippable like every other pulse.

It lives in the pulse library (Pro plans) and arrives paused when you add it, so nothing reaches your team until you've reviewed the schedule and switched it on.

Reading the report

The report leads with two gauges:

Sentiment: the average of the 1-10 positivity score, normalised like every other gauge.
Support: how supported people feel when tools change their work.

Below them, the Breakdowns section shows the full distribution for the pace and where-help questions, not just an average. The pace split is usually the most interesting: a healthy programme typically shows "about right" in the majority with a visible "too fast" minority. That minority is not a problem to argue away; it's a list of people one more tool rollout might lose. Watch whether it grows.

The where-help question turns sentiment into a to-do list. If "getting better results from the tools I have" leads, your next investment is AI learning, not another licence. If "understanding what's allowed" ranks high, publish the policy people clearly haven't seen.

The comments are the channel to leadership, verbatim. As with every pulse, our five-respondent floor applies: below five respondents in a period, the report says fewer than five people responded rather than showing the splits. Individual answers are never attributed. Your boss sees trends, not names.

Using it well

Run it unchanged for a few months before drawing conclusions; the value is in the trend line, not any single month. And when a month's result prompts a change (a slower quarter, a written policy, more hands-on help), say so to your team. Nothing improves survey response rates like evidence that the answers went somewhere.