Employee and employer, both your clients. Where does your judgment actually sit?
A scored casework diagnostic for HRBPs, HR generalists and ER specialists — 19 cases on the hardest seam in any organisation, reported on a new Casework Fulcrum.
Casework, not competency claims
HR certifications test what you know about frameworks. This assessment measures what you would do with a live case: a director asking you to make a complaint disappear, a dismissal request the file contradicts, a restructure you know about and its victim who does not, new evidence arriving minutes before an outcome. Every option is defensible in the moment — only one is best supported by the organisational-justice and investigation-practice evidence.
The Casework Fulcrum is a new scoring design: every choice carries a hidden lean weight between employee advocacy and business protection, and a separate due-process weight. The report shows where your balance point genuinely sits — anchored, advocate-leaning, or protection-leaning — and whether fair process survives rank, timing and sympathy.
Five case types are scored separately — misconduct, performance, conflict, wellbeing, and restructure — because nobody is equally good at all five, and knowing which docket you handle worst is worth more than a certificate.
What you walk away with
The advocacy-protection lean computed from every choice — the reading that predicts whether businesses route around you or employees stop disclosing to you.
Whether procedure survived pressure across the cases: the difference between judgment that is right today and judgment that is defensible a year later.
Misconduct, performance, conflict, wellbeing and change cases scored separately, so your development aims at the docket you actually handle worst.
Fair investigation, balanced advisory, policy and risk application, and coaching managers — each banded with an interpretation written for practitioners.
Two concrete practices per weak discipline, written to be used on your next real case, not in a classroom.
Inside your report
Illustrative sample — your report is generated from your own responses.
Built for
- HR business partners and HR generalists who want an evidence-based read of their casework
- Employee-relations specialists and people managers moving into HR roles
- HR leaders screening or developing HRBP teams
Find your balance point
30 scored exercises · about 35 minutes · full bespoke report with your fulcrum, process gauge and case docket.
₹1,199 (incl. GST) · assessment and full report, nothing further to pay
Frequently asked questions
Four disciplines: fair investigation and due process, balanced advisory, policy and risk application, and coaching managers. It measures what you would actually do across 19 realistic HR cases — misconduct, performance, conflict, wellbeing and restructure — plus select-all, data-reading and self-check exercises.
Every option carries a graded quality score keyed to organisational-justice and investigation-practice evidence, plus a hidden advocacy-protection lean weight and a due-process weight. These build your Balance Index and Due-Process Gauge, scored separately from casework quality.
HR business partners, HR generalists, employee-relations specialists, managers moving into HR, and HR leaders assessing their teams. It assumes working HR knowledge but no specific jurisdiction — the cases turn on judgment, not local law.
About 35 minutes for 30 scored exercises. You get a full report with your balance beam, due-process gauge, five case-type scores, four discipline bands and practice notes — downloadable as a colour PDF.
₹1,199 in India (including GST) or US$11.99 elsewhere, one-time, for one full sitting and report — against HR certification prep that runs $300 to $1,500. Organisations can assess HRBP teams through AssessAll credits at 40 credits per person.
Every level from aspiring leader to the boardroom has its own readiness assessment — its own research base, scoring model and verdict report. Wherever you are now, and wherever you are heading next, there is a rung that measures it.
See every level →Methodology: Measures applied HR and employee-relations judgment through original casework items keyed to published evidence: organisational justice theory — procedural, distributive and interactional (Colquitt, 2001; Greenberg, 1990), procedural fairness in discipline and grievance handling (Folger & Cropanzano, 1998; the ACAS code of practice as a public standard), the HR business-partner role model and its tensions (Ulrich, 1997; Ulrich & Brockbank, 2005), workplace-investigation practice standards (published SHRM and CIPD guidance — constructs, not reproduced content), psychological safety and voice (Edmondson, 1999; Detert & Burris, 2007), retaliation and its chilling effects (Cortina & Magley, 2003), evidence on performance-management and documentation practice (Pulakos & O'Leary, 2011), workplace mediation and interest-based conflict resolution (Moore, 2014), reasonable-accommodation decision research (Colella, 2001), and change-communication and survivor research for restructures (Armenakis & Harris, 2002; Brockner, 1992). Casework Fulcrum is an original scoring design: each option carries an advocacy-protection lean weight and a due-process weight aggregated separately from the quality key, across five labelled case types. Items are original works; no commercial instrument is reproduced and no legal advice is given or implied.