The Disruption Proof Quiz — Vijay Pendakur Consulting

The Disruption-Proof Journey

Imagine this:

Your organization announces a major restructuring, pushes for rapid AI adoption, or pivots strategy in response to shifting market pressures. The pressure on your team spikes immediately. Goals shift. Priorities blur. Your people are asking hard questions: What does this mean for me? Do I still belong here? Can we really pull this off?

As an executive, you already know disruption is constant — restructurings, rapid AI adoption, shifting market pressures. You’ve been navigating it. The real question is whether your teams accelerate enterprise results…or become the bottleneck that costs you time, talent, and market share.

You can usually tell when performance is slipping. But with all the noise of change, it’s not always clear why — or how to course correct before it drags on results. That’s where this diagnostic comes in.

In less than two minutes, you’ll see where your team is strong, where you’re at risk, and which behaviors to focus on now to protect performance and unlock growth.

Think of it as both an early-warning system and a roadmap: practical, actionable insight that helps you strengthen the everyday behaviors that separate high-performing, disruption-ready teams from those that stall when pressure spikes.

“Think about the last major disruption your team went through — maybe a restructuring, a big tech shift, or a strategic pivot. Hold that specific moment in mind as you answer the next 10 questions.”

How to answer: Each question has a custom 1–5 scale (not a generic “strongly disagree/agree”). Read the scale under the question and select the number that best reflects what happened most consistently for your team during that disruption.

Q1 — Clarity (Goals)

During that disruption, our team maintained a shared, ranked list of top priorities and used it to make trade-offs under pressure.

1 (Never true): No shared priorities; shifting asks dictated the work day-to-day. 2 3 (Sometimes true): A list existed but wasn’t consistently used when pressure spiked. 4 5 (Always true): A living, ranked list guided decisions consistently during disruption, without senior escalation.

Q2 — Clarity (Roles & Responsibilities)

During that disruption, every team member had crystal-clear responsibilities, and handoffs between people were handled smoothly without confusion or duplication.

1 (Never true): Roles were fuzzy; duplication and dropped balls were common. 2 3 (Sometimes true): Most roles were clear, but handoffs often required back-channeling or leader intervention. 4 5 (Always true): Everyone knew their lane, and handoffs happened cleanly without slowing execution, even under disruption.

Q3 — Trust

During that disruption, my team felt confident in leadership decisions and raised concerns or risks openly, without fear of negative consequences.

1 (Never true): Decisions weren’t trusted; concerns stayed underground, or people disengaged. 2 3 (Sometimes true): Team trusted some decisions but questioned others; only a few raised issues openly. 4 5 (Always true): Leadership decisions were credible, and people consistently voiced concerns transparently — no hesitation, even in tough moments.

Q4 — Belonging / Support

During that disruption, team members actively supported one another — people checked in, celebrated small wins, and no one was left isolated or adrift.

1 (Never true): Everyone stayed in their silo; people felt invisible or ignored. 2 3 (Sometimes true): Some teammates offered support or recognition, but it was inconsistent. 4 5 (Always true): The norm was to check in and celebrate progress — everyone felt seen, connected, and supported, even in tough moments.

Q5 — Resilience Mindset

During that disruption, our team treated challenges as chances to learn and adapt, rather than threats to avoid or occasions for blame.

1 (Never true): Team defaulted to fear or blame; mistakes were hidden, growth stalled. 2 3 (Sometimes true): A few individuals leaned into learning, but many defaulted to self-protection. 4 5 (Always true): The team consistently framed disruption as a learning moment — mistakes were mined for lessons, and everyone leaned into adaptation.

Q6 — Connection/Rhythm

During that disruption, our team meetings and routines were focused and effective — they clarified priorities, aligned responsibilities, and moved work forward instead of adding confusion or stress.

1 (Never true): Meetings/routines were unstructured or draining; people left with less clarity than they came in. 2 3 (Sometimes true): Some meetings were helpful, but many lacked focus — alignment often depended on side conversations or leader intervention. 4 5 (Always true): Meetings/routines were disciplined and useful, even under pressure — people left knowing priorities, ownership, and next steps.

Q7 — Execution / Accountability

During that disruption, team members followed through on commitments — people owned their work and delivered on time, without deflecting responsibility or letting things slide.

1 (Never true): Commitments were frequently missed; ownership was weak, accountability absent. 2 3 (Sometimes true): Some people delivered, but follow-through was uneven; deadlines slipped or needed leader intervention. 4 5 (Always true): Commitments were reliably met under pressure — ownership was the norm, and accountability was shared across the team.

Q8 — Adaptability

During that disruption, our team was able to pivot quickly — we adjusted plans and roles without losing momentum or needing constant escalation.

1 (Never true): Team resisted change; pivots caused confusion, delays, or paralysis. 2 3 (Sometimes true): Team could adjust in some cases, but shifts often slowed momentum or required heavy leader intervention. 4 5 (Always true): Team consistently flexed and adapted under pressure — plans and roles shifted smoothly, and momentum was sustained.

Q9 — Alignment / Team of Leaders

During that disruption, leaders in our group acted as one team — making decisions together, sharing accountability, and putting enterprise results ahead of individual agendas.

1 (Never true): Leaders prioritized their own functions; decisions were fragmented, accountability was siloed, and enterprise results suffered. 2 3 (Sometimes true): Leaders aligned on some big calls, but often defaulted to defending their own turf; shared accountability was inconsistent. 4 5 (Always true): Leaders consistently operated as a true team of leaders — decisions were collective, accountability was shared, and enterprise outcomes came first.

Q10 — Energy / Sustainability

During that disruption, our team sustained energy and engagement — people stayed focused and productive without burning out or disengaging.

1 (Never true): Disruption drained the team; burnout, withdrawal, or disengagement were widespread. 2 3 (Sometimes true): Some people kept energy up, but many showed signs of fatigue, stress, or withdrawal; performance was uneven. 4 5 (Always true): The team maintained high energy and engagement throughout disruption — people stayed productive, resilient, and connected without tipping into burnout.

Please answer all questions.