"We keep talking about this." In about 30 days, your team will have done something about it.
Get started →Most organizations are running several AI initiatives at once — a committee, a fellows program, a center of excellence, individuals figuring it out alone. None of it connects. Pend brings the same people into one engagement that compounds.
Four phases, configured to your organization. People-first AI enablement, built with your team in real time.
Run the diagnostic. Surface where leadership and staff actually stand. Build the shared baseline.
→Walk the findings together. Decide which four artifacts your team will build in the working sessions.
→Your team builds the tools, policies, and methods in the room. Same day, same week — not a project plan.
→What your team built spreads to other departments and teams. Re-run the diagnostic next year to measure what moved.
→Every AI initiative is built on assumptions about where people stand — how they use AI, what they trust, what they need. The diagnostic replaces those assumptions with measurement, and gives every part of your organization the same starting line.
Five tensions structure how people make AI decisions through their actual work — Priorities, Strategy, Expertise, Trust, Identity. The diagnostic measures where each individual lands, then aggregates into orientation profiles and role-level patterns.
Three working relationships emerge from how people work with AI — Author (directs the work), Collaborator (figures it out together), Delegator (assigns and moves on). The diagnostic identifies who's who, and what's compounding underneath each pattern.
The diagnostic measures what the organization has put in place — tool access, training, support — alongside what people are doing independently: shadow tools, self-directed learning, self-built workflows. The gap between the two is where the real story lives.
Same population. Same scale. The score for using tools the organization hasn't provided runs 30 points ahead of the score for knowing how to apply the tools it has. They're the same problem.
The diagnostic gives everyone the same starting point. This session uses it. In 90 minutes, leadership and staff look at the findings together and decide: which problems are worth solving first, in which domains, for which people. No more AI decisions made by whoever yelled loudest. The data is in the room.
Four working sessions. Each one produces something your team uses immediately — not a recommendation to implement later. A tool, a policy, a workflow, a playbook. Built in the room and deployed the same week. What you build depends on where your data pointed.
Built in one session. Routes every AI decision that lands on a desk — without re-litigating the same questions each time.
The diagnostic is 15 minutes per person. The configure session is 90 minutes for the leadership team. Each working session runs about two hours. Total time commitment for someone at the center of the engagement is roughly one day spread across 30 days. Everyone else touches it once — the diagnostic — and gets to use what their colleagues built.
Yes. Some organizations run the diagnostic first to understand where they are before committing to the working sessions. The report stands on its own. Most find that the configure session is the natural next step — the data surfaces questions that are hard to resolve without a structured conversation.
A speaker leaves. A committee produces a document. Pend produces something your team built themselves — which means they understand it, own it, and actually use it. The diagnostic also replaces the assumptions that drive most committee work: instead of debating where the organization is with AI, you start from data.
Everything your team builds in the working sessions is yours — the tools, the frameworks, the policies, the workflows. We don't retain any rights to what gets created. The diagnostic report is also yours and remains confidential.
Yes, and this is how the data becomes genuinely useful over time. A second deployment six to twelve months later shows you exactly what moved — did the leadership gap narrow? Did shadow tool usage shift after the working sessions? We discount repeat engagements significantly.
Reports are presented at the group level — role and department, never individual. Where group sizes are small enough that individuals could be identifiable, we suppress or aggregate those cells. No individual is identifiable from any finding in the report.
Individual responses are confidential and never shared. Your organization's results are yours — we hold them in confidence and don't sell or publish them. With explicit permission, anonymized aggregate findings may inform published research. Without it, your data informs only your organization.
Have a question we didn't answer? Get started →
First diagnostic in two weeks. One conversation to get started.