Operators and scientists, in the same room.
Thrive is built by people who have run workforces and people who have spent careers measuring them — psychometricians, physiologists and organisational researchers working alongside operators who've felt the cost of getting it wrong.
The people accountable
for the instrument.
A small team with an unusual mix: workforce operators, measurement scientists and engineers. Every score the platform produces is owned by someone here.
Sets the product thesis: that capacity — not sentiment — is the leading indicator of sustainable performance. Previously led people and operations at scale across [sector].
Owns the psychometric validity of the Thrive Index — factor structure, reliability and predictive testing. Background in quantitative psychology and validated-instrument design.
Turns the science into something a manager reads in four minutes. Responsible for the dashboards, the action layer and the rule that every score links to a recommendation.
Owns the validity of the Engagement Index — psychological safety, meaning and the organisational conditions that enable performance — held to the standard of the organisational-behaviour field. Background in HR and people analytics.
Runs the validation programme — the longitudinal cohorts and the planned biomarker study that ties self-report to objective physiology. Background in human physiology and field studies.
Sits with CHROs and operators through deployment — making sure the index lands as a plan, not a report. Previously led people analytics inside enterprise HR.
The people who keep us honest.
Independent advisors who review the methodology, challenge the claims and hold the validation programme to a clinical standard. They are paid for their time, not their endorsement.
Reviews how the Rest domain is operationalised — sleep architecture, circadian consistency and recovery — against the clinical sleep-science literature.
Advises on the Recovery and Calm domains — how chronic stress accumulates physiologically, and how to measure it without over-claiming.
Holds the Engagement Index to the standard of the organisational-behaviour field — psychological safety, meaning and the conditions that enable performance.
Independent reviewer of the index's factor structure, reliability and measurement invariance across regions — the maths behind whether a score means what we say it means.
Standing on published science.
The Thrive Index is built on the peer-reviewed work of the researchers who define these fields. They are not affiliated with Thrive at Work — their published research is the foundation our instruments are derived and validated against.
To be clear: the researchers above are cited as the scientific basis for our methodology. Listing them is an acknowledgement of their published work — not a claim of endorsement or affiliation.
We're hiring the people
who'll shape this.
Scientists, engineers and operators who think workforce measurement deserves the rigour of clinical science. If that's you, we'd like to talk.