P-SAP™ Instrument

From Framework
to Instrument.

The P-SAP™ is a 24-question assessment. Six markers. One clear picture of where synergy holds and where it does not.

The Instrument

An Assessment Tool.
Not a Survey.

The Pragadian™ Synergy Alignment Profile (P-SAP™) is the measurement instrument derived directly from the PMHS™ framework. Where the PMHS™ provides the architecture, the map of how human performance works, the P-SAP™ provides the means to read that map in a real person, in a real organisation, right now.

What sets P-SAP™ apart from a standard assessment is its reference point. Most tools compare an individual against a population average. They tell you where someone sits on a bell curve. The P-SAP™ does not do this. It evaluates each person against a structurally defined threshold: the point below which the system cannot function sustainably, regardless of how they compare to anyone else. This is called a criterion-referenced approach, and it is what makes the assessment actionable rather than descriptive.

24 Validated Questions Criterion-Referenced Six Structural Markers

"The P-SAP™ does not compare you to a population average. It asks whether the system is structurally viable and reads three layers of evidence to answer that question."

PMHS™ Research, Chapter 4
The Six Markers

Six Markers. Each One a
Structural Condition.

The PMHS™ maps four interdependent states. When operationalised into the P-SAP™, two additional markers are introduced to complete the diagnostic circuit. One governs whether the system has the capacity to function at all. The other measures whether the system can sustain itself over time.

H Humanistic C Cognitive M Motivational B Behavioral SF Signal Fidelity MFT Capacity Gate P-SAP™ SIX MARKERS

The four core states H, C, M and B are defined in full on the PMHS™ Model page. The P-SAP™ introduces two additional structural markers that complete the diagnostic circuit: one that confirms whether the system has the basic capacity to function, and one that measures whether information is moving through the system cleanly.

MFT · Minimum Functioning Threshold
The Capacity Gate
Baseline energy, resources, and functional load
Before any of the four states can be meaningfully assessed, the system must first confirm that the person has the basic physical and mental capacity to operate. The MFT evaluates three things: whether the individual has sufficient energy, whether they have access to the tools and information they need, and whether their current workload allows them to maintain quality without systemic breakdown. If the MFT falls below threshold, the diagnostic stops. Not because the other markers are unimportant, but because assessing them on a depleted system produces misleading results. Recovery comes first. This is what separates a diagnostic from a questionnaire.
⬡ System Layer
SF · Signal Fidelity
The Feedback Loop
Structural integrity of information flow
Signal Fidelity measures whether the feedback loop between an individual and their environment is intact and functioning. It is not enough for a person to be motivated and clear about their role if the organisation around them is not returning accurate, consistent signals about what is working and what isn't. Low Signal Fidelity produces what the PMHS™ calls the Echo Chamber Effect™, where the system appears engaged but is operating on distorted or absent information. The SF marker detects this before it corrupts upstream health. It is the only marker that evaluates the channel between person and system, rather than the person alone.
⬡ System Layer
Why P-SAP™

Not Another
Engagement Survey.

Most diagnostic tools ask people how they feel and report back what was said. That is self-report. It is useful, but it has a significant limitation: people are not always accurate about themselves. Not out of dishonesty, but because the gap between how we perceive our own state and what our actual patterns reveal is a well-documented feature of human psychology.

The P-SAP™ addresses this through the Semantic Validity and Coherence Index (SVCI). Rather than relying on a single layer of input, the SVCI cross-references each person's responses across three distinct perspectives simultaneously. The result is a validated reading of where the person actually is, not just where they believe themselves to be.

When the three perspectives diverge significantly, the system raises a Drift Flag. That divergence is itself a structural finding, and often the most important one in the report. It tells the organisation that the gap between perception and reality is large enough to affect decision-making, feedback receptivity, and intervention outcomes.

!
A significant Drift Flag does not mean someone is being dishonest. It means the distance between how they see themselves and what the validated evidence shows is large enough to be treated as a structural condition, one that requires a different kind of intervention than skill development alone.
01
What You Say
Self-Report
The individual's direct account of how they experience each dimension of their working life. This is a genuine and important signal. It reflects perceived state. The P-SAP™ takes it seriously. But it does not treat it as the only truth.
02
What You Do
Behavioural Proxy
Questions anchored to observable actions and situational responses rather than feelings. Behavioural patterns are significantly harder to unconsciously distort than attitudinal statements. This layer reflects demonstrated state.
03
What Is Possible
Lawful Proxy
Boundary conditions set by the known limits of human biology and cognitive capacity. Given the conditions described, is the self-reported state structurally possible? This layer provides a scientifically grounded floor and ceiling that neither the individual nor the organisation can override.
Sample Report

See the Assessment
No Barnum Effect. Concise. Actionable.

P-SAP™ Structured Assessment

Download a Sample
Report.

Download Sample Report

The full report includes your Output Identity, Masked Effect™ profile, Quit Probability Index, and more.