Real Case · Data Protected

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
IN FACILITATION

"This report documents the real evaluation of a KATA System facilitator with the tool Intrinsic Motivators. Identifiable data has been protected to preserve the client's confidentiality."

15
KATA criteria
4.6
Average /5
92%
Performance
Real Case
Case Fact Sheet

KATA SYSTEM
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP DOJO

Tool: Intrinsic Motivators
10 Motivators · Collective Emotional Map
Evaluation of 3 areas with 15 criteria
Official KATA guide · Comparison included
Case data

CONTEXT
AND GOAL OF THE SESSION

As part of the KATA training, the Intrinsic Motivators tool was facilitated, with the goal of encouraging individual self-awareness, empathy within the team and the identification of gaps between personal motivators and what the organisation offers

This tool enables key conversations about emotional climate and the meaning of work. The dynamic is based on a classification of 10 motivators: each participant prioritises the 3 that drive them most in their work context, then the team reflects together and visualises the "collective emotional map" to design improvement actions.

Technical Case Data Confidential
Facilitator
Client Company
Session Date 2025
Tool Intrinsic Motivators
Platform Miro + live facilitation
No. of participants
Country / Region
Evaluation Framework 15 KATA Criteria

The client's personal and identifying details have been hidden. The scores, quotes and observations correspond to the real case.

KATA Evaluation System

SCORES BY
FACILITATION CRITERION

15 criteria across 3 dimensions. Scale of 1 to 5. Overall average: 4.6 / 5.0

Area I · The Facilitator's Role
Criterion 01
Guides the team towards its best version
4.5/5High
Criterion 02
Adapts to the team's pace
5.0/5Excellent
Criterion 03
Creates a climate of trust
5.0/5Excellent
Area II · Facilitation Tools
Criterion 04
Asks powerful questions
4.5/5High
Criterion 05
Brings the unspoken to the surface
5.0/5Excellent
Criterion 06
Recaps and reinforces key points
4.0/5Improve
Criterion 07
Prompts action
4.5/5High
Criterion 08
Gives the whole team a voice
5.0/5Excellent
Criterion 09
Facilitates feedback processes
4.0/5Improve
Criterion 10
Uses metaphors to describe the team
3.0/5To work on
Area III · Facilitation Methodology
Criterion 11
Preparation in advance
5.0/5Excellent
Criterion 12
Connect / Framing
5.0/5Excellent
Criterion 13
Diverge · Exploration phase
5.0/5Excellent
Criterion 14
Converge · Synthesis
4.5/5High
Criterion 15
Commit and Close
4.5/5High
Analysis by criterion

DETAILED OBSERVATIONS
FROM THE EVALUATOR

Area I · The Facilitator's Role
Criterion 01
Guides the team towards its best version

got the team to look at itself from a new perspective and reflect on its organisational culture. The focus on personal motivators and building the collective map were key tools for that realisation.

Area to improve

Why it isn't a 5: It didn't close with explicit transformative actions to strengthen the motivators that weren't covered.

4.5
/5
Criterion 02
Adapts to the team's pace

They changed the original approach of working with all 10 motivators, simplifying to 3 per participant to respect the timing without losing depth. They also offered alternatives to anyone who couldn't use the Miro tool (), showing sensitivity and agility in facilitation.

Criterion met
5.0
/5
Criterion 03
Creates a climate of trust

From the first interventions they contained, validated and made room for emotions. Participants expressed themselves honestly and naturally, even sharing organisational frustrations.

Criterion met

Key example observed: "Don't worry, that's normal" — a response to someone who said they felt lost at the start of the session.

5.0
/5
Area II · Facilitation Tools
Criterion 04
Asks powerful questions

They opened with an excellent emotional question ("What motivates you when you get to work?") and followed with others, well framed, that invited introspection and meaningful conversation.

Area to improve

They could have asked more provocative questions about organisational purpose or redesigning roles around motivators.

4.5
/5
Criterion 05
Brings the unspoken to the surface

They made it possible for delicate topics to surface, such as authoritarianism, demotivation and frustration at shifting incentives. Participants put words to what "normally goes unsaid" in work settings.

Criterion met
5.0
/5
Criterion 06
Recaps and reinforces key points

showed the motivator map visually and highlighted collective findings ("Freedom is what we value most").

Point to improve

The close lacked an explicit summary of the key learnings or group agreements.

4.0
/5
Criterion 07
Prompts action

They opened up the possibility of thinking about future actions and encouraged reflections such as "What can we do as an organisation so there's more freedom here?"

Observation

No concrete actions or owners were defined, which left the session on more reflective than actionable ground.

4.5
/5
Criterion 08
Gives the whole team a voice

Everyone took part. didn't just make room, they actively facilitated inclusion, even adapting the digital tool for those with technical difficulties.

Criterion met
5.0
/5
Criterion 09
Facilitates feedback processes

Although there was no formal feedback round, peer feedback emerged spontaneously throughout the conversation.

Suggestion

They could have asked at the close: "What did this session give you?" / "What could we do better?"

4.0
/5
Criterion 10
Uses metaphors to describe the team

No metaphors or images were observed that would help represent the team's state.

A missed opportunity

Given that intrinsic motivators lend themselves so well to the symbolic, using metaphors would have enriched the close of the session considerably.

3.0
/5
Area III · Facilitation Methodology
Criterion 11
Preparation in advance

Fluent command of the content, a clear explanation of the 10 motivators with examples, an adapted Miro template and quick resolution of technical difficulties. They clearly prepared the session in depth.

Criterion met
5.0
/5
Criterion 12
Connect / Framing

The session opened with an emotional question tied to the tool's purpose. The framing was clear and psychological safety was held throughout.

Criterion met
5.0
/5
Criterion 13
Diverge · Exploration phase

facilitated open exploration of motivations, without judgement. They validated every answer, respected the timing and didn't steer the team's choices.

Criterion met

Result: A rich diversity of profiles became visible, prioritising relationships, order, freedom, curiosity and goals.

5.0
/5
Criterion 14
Converge · Synthesis

A collective map was produced that made group patterns visible. It was analysed with perspective and valuable reflections came out of it.

Missed opportunity

Defining one or two key ideas or group agreements more explicitly would have raised the impact of the close.

4.5
/5
Criterion 15
Commit and Close

The close was emotionally powerful. They asked: "How do you see this dynamic in your own organisations?", which connected well with transferring it to the real context.

Area to improve

What was missing was a moment for concrete commitments or defining actionable next steps.

4.5
/5
Observed Evidence

IMPACT OBSERVED
DURING THE SESSION

Key moments documented by the evaluator that show the facilitator's real performance.

Opening Moment

"From the start, created an atmosphere of closeness and equality. Opening with an emotional question was the right call to switch on the team's sense of connection."

— Evaluator's record

Moment of Inclusion

"This is my first time in Takumi, I have no idea where I stand right now." —

The facilitator's reply: "Don't worry, that's normal."

— Session transcript

Moment of Collective Insight

"We're all asking for more autonomy. We don't like that culture of control and threat."

— Participant during the collective map exercise

Keeping Focus

"I understand that everyone here should be playing the role of …"

A timely correction of the framing when the conversation started drifting away from the simulation context.

— Evaluator's record

Methodological check

COMPARISON WITH
THE OFFICIAL KATA GUIDE

Element required by the guide
Met?
Evaluator's observation
Clear explanation of the 10 motivators

explained each motivator with examples and accessible language.

Active participation from everyone

Every member shared their choice of motivators out loud.

Adaptive use of time (only 3 motivators)

adapted the timing efficiently, as the official guide recommends.

Collective map to see trends

A chart with the team's aggregated scores was displayed.

Reflection on motivators in daily work

Done with open participation and explicit emotions: "I feel frustrated", "I can't be curious here…"

Identification of cultural improvement opportunities

Ideas for change came up, though no clear action commitments were defined (left as a bridge to the next session).

Met
Partially met
Contribution to development

HOW THE SESSION STRENGTHENED
THE FACILITATOR'S CHALLENGES

Challenge 1
Building a team identity

The session created a climate of trust where participants spoke honestly about their frustrations and values.

The "collective emotional map" made visible what the team really values (freedom, relationships, order) — direct input for building identity.

helped the shift from individual reflection to a collective awareness aligned with the idea of shared purpose.

Challenge 2
Developing people individually

The tool demands active listening to each member, which helps in understanding personal motivations.

adapted the format to respect each participant's pace and technical difficulties, showing an orientation towards individual support.

Prioritising motivators works as a bridge to one-to-one conversations in personalised development plans.

Challenge 3
Balancing a human focus with results

The session had high emotional and reflective impact, but stayed more on the side of insight than concrete action. Very human, with room to strengthen the commitment to sustainable actions.

They planted the seed by connecting emotion with organisational improvement: "What can we do so there's more freedom here?"

Challenge 4
Influencing peer teams and organisational culture

The tool exposes gaps between the team's values and organisational practice — the basis for making the case in conversations with other leaders.

showed methodological and emotional command that reinforces their credibility as a catalyst for a deeper conversation about shared leadership and culture .

Overall result of the case

THE EVALUATOR'S
GENERAL CONCLUSION

showed clear command of the tool, the emotional sensitivity to hold an honest space, and adaptability to where the group was. Their body language, tone of voice and attitude were consistent with a facilitator who leads without taking centre stage.

Strengths observed

Real-time adaptability — Simplified from 10 motivators to 3 without losing methodological depth.

Building psychological safety — Participants put words to what normally goes unsaid in work settings.

Active inclusion — Zero participants left without a voice, with digital adaptation for those who had technical difficulties.

Fluent methodological command — Preparation evident in the handling of the content and quick resolution of the unexpected.

Priority development areas

Strengthen the final recap with an explicit synthesis of learnings and group agreements.

Bring in metaphors and symbolic language to represent the team's state.

Turn reflections into concrete actions with owners defined.

Overall Score for the Case
4.6/5
Average of the 15 KATA criteria
Performance: 92%

Summary by area

The Facilitator's Role4.83
Tools4.43
Methodology4.80
Audit Radar View KATA Score
FACILITATOR ROLE TOOLS METAPHORS FEEDBACK METHODOLOGY TRUST
KATA System · El Dojo

WANT TO EVALUATE
YOUR TEAM OF FACILITATORS?

"This is just one of the reports we produce in the KATA System. Every session evaluated becomes behavioural evidence for the development of the facilitator and the team."

Discover the KATA System