It quantifies hidden productivity and cost impacts caused by cultural misalignment in diverse teams and shows the realistic ROI of targeted alignment interventions.

You provide five inputs: team size, average salary, number of nationalities, remote work percentage, and estimated hours lost per person per week due to misalignment.

Include time spent clarifying misunderstandings, reworking tasks, extending meetings, and resolving avoidable conflicts. In diverse teams, two to five hours per person per week is a common range.

More cultural backgrounds and higher remote distribution increase coordination effort and reduce shared context. These factors compound, creating non-linear performance drag.

It ensures realistic results. As team complexity increases, improvement remains significant but not absolute. Some friction is structural in global, distributed teams.

Salary data is converted into hourly cost and multiplied by lost time, team size, and annual workload. This translates cultural misalignment into tangible operational cost.

It assumes sustained cultural alignment work, not one-off training. Improvements are conservative, evidence-based, and adjusted to team complexity.

It indicates how much of your salary investment turns into productive output versus being consumed by friction.

Use the financial impact and before/after comparison to frame alignment as an execution and performance topic, not a cultural initiative.

Use the results to prioritize action. A discovery conversation helps validate assumptions and identify where alignment efforts will deliver the highest performance impact.