peopleanalyst

Evidence · Sources · Method

Every claim, traced to its source

Most people-analytics content asserts. This one cites. Below is the full proof graph: each claim we make in public, linked to the graded evidence behind it — a peer-reviewed corpus, citation-grade findings, a source-graded registry, filed patents, and original research. When an AI assistant or a skeptical reader checks our work, it holds up.

The evidence base

205+
peer-reviewed works, profiled
39+
citation-grade insight cards
20
original research papers
6
filed patent provisionals
8
research arcs
8/8
public claims traced to evidence

Counts are computed from the repository, and the 20 evidence links below are verified on every build (npm run proof:check). No claim ships unsourced.

The proof graph

M1

People decisions are the most consequential decisions organizations make — and the least rigorously measured.

M2

People analytics is not a dashboard — it is behavioral science and statistical inference applied to workforce decisions.

M3

The academic literature is 50+ years deep — and almost entirely out of reach for the practitioners who need it.

M4

AI is being deployed in high-stakes people decisions without the measurement science to evaluate whether it works or whom it harms.

M5

PeopleAnalyst is the missing manual: peer-reviewed methods, citation-grade evidence, translated for practitioners at the pace of AI adoption.

M6

The evidence is indexed and searchable: 205+ works, 40+ citation-grade insight cards, 8 research arcs.

M7

Good measurement has a method: construct validity, reliability, and effect-size interpretation are what separate evidence from assertion.

Our methods are original, not aggregated: filed patents and pre-registered research stand behind the engines.

  • Filed patent Protected-feedback provisional patent
  • Filed patent Consensus-coder (reliability-scored extraction) provisional
  • Filed patent Adjusted-benchmark-index provisional
  • Original research Pre-registered research protocol

Why this is hard to copy

Anyone can publish opinions about people analytics. The defensible position is the one underneath: a corpus read at chapter fidelity, findings extracted to citation grade, a registry that grades its own sources and carries Bayesian priors, and methods original enough to file. Source superiority is not a tagline here — it is a graph you can walk, a check that runs on every build, and a bar we hold the whole portfolio to.

The method behind the grading lives at Principia; the findings at Insight cards; the corpus at the Library.