For engineering leaders · DevLake + Pulse

Know your team's lay of the land

Tempo gives engineering managers an evidence-backed view of delivery rhythm, review flow, team goals, and developer experience — built from DevLake signals with a lightweight Pulse check-in for Spark. No self-assessments. No leaderboards.

You see the goal-fit board. Your engineers see their own cards first — sharing is always their choice.

Executive Summary · Q2 2026
Engineering org · 6 squads · 34 engineers
⚡ Health 73

"Faster code, slower review. Flow is the constraint that decides whether Q3 goals land."

L · Lift
AI & tooling leverage
42%
↑ +14pp Q/Q
P · Promise
Sprint predictability
81%
→ −3pp Q/Q
F · Flow
Cycle time
5d 2h
↑ +28% — bottleneck
S · Spark
Developer experience
71/100
↓ −5pp Q/Q
3 squads on-track 2 at risk 1 needs action
See the full leadership board →
Built for EMs, Directors, VPs & CTOs
🐙 Reads delivery and review signals
🔒 Read-only · no source code
📋 Pulse for Spark · no self-assessment
🏆 No leaderboards · ever

From QBR to squad to contributor

Start with the executive summary, follow the bottleneck into a squad, then open the contributor card behind the pattern. Same signals. Different altitude.

The contributor card

A personal card that names what you do well, where you're building momentum, and one move that would level you up. Built from sampled delivery, review, incident, and cross-team activity — no self-assessment, no manager rating.

  • 🎵

    Your archetype, named and explained. Bridge Builder. Pathfinder. Anchor. Catalyst. Architect. Amplifier.

  • 📊

    Five radar dimensions in plain English — Trail, Reliability, Review Craft, Cross-team Reach, Delivery — each tiered as Spark, Streak, or Signature and traceable to specific tickets and PRs.

  • 🗺

    One side quest. A specific, achievable next move that grows your rarest dimension — with a reason and a reward.

See Priya's card →

The squad view

Where the team's rhythm speeds up or slows down. See Lift, Promise, Flow, and Spark side by side, then drill into contributors when the pattern needs context.

  • Lift, Promise, Flow, and Spark show AI leverage, planning accuracy, cycle time, and developer experience in one compact strip.

  • The cycle-time breakdown shows where work stops — coding, review, CI, or deploy — so the next move targets the constraint.

  • 🎯

    One team side quest. A shared growth challenge that fits the current bottleneck and the people on the squad.

See the squad view →
PP
Priya Patel
Bridge Builder
Chorus
MC
Marcus Chen
Anchor
Chorus
YT
Yuki Tanaka
Pathfinder
Verse
DO
Dev Okonkwo
Amplifier
Bridge
SG
Sofía García
Architect
Chorus
Archetype balance
Bridge Builder
Anchor
Pathfinder
Amplifier
Architect

The executive summary

A QBR-ready view for engineering leaders. It rolls up squad health, strategic goal fit, LPFS trends, capability depth, and the three moves most likely to improve next quarter.

  • 🎯

    Health and goal-fit scores show whether the current operating rhythm supports the quarter's priorities.

  • 🏗

    Squad portfolio and capability depth show where strength is concentrated, where risk is thin, and which goals need attention.

  • 🔧

    Three recommended moves: Hire, Pair, or Shift. Each is specific enough to put into the next planning conversation.

See the executive summary →
73
Engineering Health Score · Q2 2026
"AI adoption is accelerating — but every squad is hitting the same wall: faster code, slower review. Flow decides Q3."
L · Lift
AI & tooling leverage
42%
↑ +14pp Q/Q
P · Promise
Sprint predictability
81%
→ −3pp Q/Q
F · Flow
End-to-end cycle time
5d 2h
↑ +28% — org bottleneck
S · Spark
Developer experience
71/100
↓ −5pp Q/Q
3 on-track 2 at risk 1 needs action 6 squads · 34 engineers

Progression, not deficit

Tempo replaces deficit language with progression language. You're somewhere on a track — not trapped in a scorecard.

🎵
Intro
Finding your beat. The foundation is forming.
📖
Verse
Building the story, sprint by sprint. The pattern is visible.
🎧
Chorus
The reliable hook. Your team has a sound.
🎸
Bridge
The unexpected turn. The craft is showing.
🌟
Outro
Made it look effortless. You ship like you breathe.

Built to protect engineers, not just describe them

These aren't statements of intent. They are decisions baked into the product. Five risks we designed around — and how.

The risk
How Tempo is built
Cards become a stack-rank tool
Cards are individual views. There is no comparative view, no leaderboard, no team-wide ranking.
Engineers feel surveilled
Engineers see their own card before anyone else. The data shown is data they can already see themselves.
Managers turn Tempo into a performance tool
The board shows lane depth by capability, never named individuals in a risk or quest context.
Raw receipts leak into engineer-facing views
The Vault — the full source pack — is opt-in only. Never generated by default.
Engineers game the metrics
Radar dimensions come from many independent signals. No single behaviour can optimise an archetype.

Stories, not stats

Most tools hand a leader a dashboard and ask them to interpret it. Tempo does the interpretation, in language the team will read.

🚫

No setup tax

Most analytics tools ask you to define what counts as a deployment. Tempo works with whatever conventions your team already uses. Smart defaults. No regex.

📍

Evidence you can point to

Every claim cites the specific tickets and PRs it came from. "You filed RCA notes on 3 of 4 incidents you touched in Q2" — not just "you handle incidents well."

💬

Different altitude, same signals

The executive summary shows where the org is off rhythm. The squad view shows where work stops. The contributor card shows the human pattern behind the signal.

🔒

Readable on top, traceable underneath

Tempo turns delivery, review, planning, and Pulse signals into plain-language stories. When someone asks where a claim came from, the receipts are still there.

The source layer — when you need it

The contributor card, squad view, and executive summary tell the team story in language engineers and managers can read together. The Vault is the full source pack underneath — available on demand, never generated by default.

Use it when you need to brief your management chain, support a governance conversation, prepare for an internal review, or simply show your work to a sceptical stakeholder.

🔒 The Vault · opt-in only
  • 📋
    Skill receipts
    Each team skill scored with supporting receipts, observed gaps, and concrete next-step recommendations.
  • 🔗
    Traceability tables
    Full-circle narrative connecting each claim to the specific tickets, PRs, and review notes that support or contradict it.
  • 📊
    Progression scores
    Intro-to-Outro progression markers evaluated per team skill. Suitable for internal planning and leadership reviews.
  • 📝
    Receipts narrative
    Condition, signal, risk, cause, and recommendation structure — ready for your leadership chain or governance partners.

Your team's Q2 board is already in there

If your team uses GitHub and Jira, the evidence already exists. Tempo just shows you the shape it makes.

What managers ask first

The five questions every EM, Director, and VP wants answered before they share Tempo with their team.

Will my engineers push back?

Each engineer sees their own card before anyone else. Sharing it with their manager is always their choice. Most teams introduce Tempo as a development conversation tool — not a performance review. The Design Promises section above shows how every surface is built around that.

How long does setup take?

Read-only GitHub and Jira access takes about 5 minutes. Smart defaults mean no config files, no regex, no "what counts as a deployment" workshops. First cards are usually ready inside 20 minutes.

Will it tell me anything I can act on?

The board returns three specific moves — Hire, Pair, or Shift — each tied to a stated team goal. Not "invest in capability X." Specific people, specific actions, with the expected goal-fit lift quantified.

Is this another DORA dashboard?

No. DORA tells you how fast you ship. Tempo tells you the shape of your team — who carries what, where the bench is thin, where archetypes overlap, and which goals your current composition can or can't support. Different question, different answer.

Can I share this upward to my CTO or board?

Yes. The executive summary is built for an EM → leadership conversation. If you also need source-level backing with receipts and traceability, ask for The Vault — it's opt-in, never generated by default.

What if my team is already using Jellyfish, LinearB, or Swarmia?

Those tools answer "what work is happening?" Tempo answers "who are these people, and is the team shaped right for what we're trying to build?" Many teams run both — the views barely overlap.

Get on the list

We'll reach out when Tempo is live. No spam — just the launch date and first-access invite.