Open, no sign-up

What are the people in this deal worth?

Every deal prices the assets, the earnings and the risk. Human capital enters the model as a blank — not because it cannot be measured, but because nobody agreed on the unit.

This is that unit. Team score minus friction gives the deal score; its distance from 50 is the human delta, and 1 point ≈ 1% of price.

How to read it

  1. Step 1

    The team

    Each person is compared with the benchmark range their role requires at the target's stage of corporate life — 287 professions across 8 stages. Load the sample team or enter your own.

  2. Step 2

    The friction

    Six conditions of the transaction itself: culture distance, integration depth, governance change, growth engine, timeline and retention. A capable team can still be rejected by the receiving organisation.

  3. Step 3

    The money

    Above 50 the people add value, below it they cost money. NDC = 1 − delta ÷ 50, in the convention of beta, and (NDC − 1.0) × the equity risk premium gives the human capital risk premium in basis points.

The deal

Culture proximity (buyer vs target)55
Opposite operating logicSame species of company

Different but compatible; translation needed, not conversion.

Integration depth55
Autonomous — keeps running itselfFull absorption

Partial integration: shared reporting and some systems, local autonomy preserved.

Governance & pace change55
Same rhythm as beforeNew owner’s rhythm

New reporting lines and some KPI changes, familiar operating pace.

Growth engine after close35
Grow with the people we haveGrow by hiring

Mixed: selected hires around an existing core.

Value thesis60
Cost, control, efficiencyGrowth, product, innovation

Balanced thesis — some efficiency, some growth.

Integration timeline9 months
3 months24 months

Fast but survivable with a disciplined plan.

Key-person retention lock40
NoneStrong — earnouts, retention, non-competes

Partial: some retention packages, some exposure.

The team

CSV or TSV. Headers in English or Russian: a participant code, the eight scales, optionally a role. The file is read in your browser and never uploaded.

    Add at least one person — or load the sample team — to see the result.

    What to do with the result

    The coefficient is an argument for a valuation committee, not an answer. Each band names an action on the transaction — a premium, a discount, an escrow, a holdback, a restructure — because that is the only place the number can honestly act.

    1. EXCEPTIONALΔ ≥ 20A 5–15% premium is defensible. The people are the seller's strongest argument, and this is the rare case where the human side of the deal justifies paying up.
    2. STRONGΔ ≥ 10A premium of up to 5%, and a lighter escrow. The integration plan can be less defensive than a standard deal of this size would require.
    3. ADEQUATEΔ ≥ 0No adjustment either way. The financials drive the deal, and human capital is neither an argument for paying more nor a reason to pay less.
    4. ELEVATEDΔ ≥ -10A 5–10% discount — or, better, fix the named causes before close and re-run the assessment. At this level the causes are usually specific and addressable in the deal design.
    5. HIGH RISKΔ ≥ -20A 10–20% discount, a bigger holdback and key-person insurance. The transaction remains doable, but its protective structure has to carry the risk the price alone cannot.
    6. CRITICALΔ ≥ -30A 20–30% discount, or restructure the transaction. At this depth a discount alone rarely helps: the terms, the pace or the integration model are usually what needs to change.
    7. WALK AWAYThe human risk exceeds the financial opportunity. This is a verdict on the transaction as designed, not on any person in it — a differently structured deal for the same asset may well land elsewhere on this scale.

    These are reference adjustments for a valuation discussion, not investment, legal or valuation advice on any specific transaction. Each band is a verdict on the transaction as designed, never on anyone in it.

    What this is not

    • Not a judgement on individuals. It prices team-level integration risk for one transaction. A low fit means the role and the stage ask for something a person does not naturally supply — a design problem, not a verdict on a human being.
    • Not a replacement for diligence. It replaces the absence of a number where a number was always needed, not the interviews or the judgement.
    • Not a guarantee. The composite coefficient has not yet been back-tested against completed transactions, and that is stated in every document about it.
    • Not advice. Nothing here is investment, legal or valuation advice on any specific transaction.

    Everything is computed in your browser. The file you load is read locally and is never uploaded, stored or sent anywhere. The only network request is the benchmark range for a role you actually use.

    Questions

    What does the NeuroDelta Coefficient (NDC) mean?

    NDC restates the human delta as a multiplier centred on 1.0, deliberately matching the convention of beta, which every investment professional already reads without translation. Above 1.0 the deal carries priced human risk; below 1.0, a documented premium.

    Where do the role requirements come from?

    The NeuroFrame Profile Library: 287 professions across 34 occupational areas, taken from the Russian Ministry of Labour occupational register and professional standards, each profiled across the 8 stages of the Adizes corporate lifecycle — 2296 benchmark profiles in total.

    Why does the same role have different requirements at different stages?

    Because the same job title demands different things depending on how old the organisation is. A finance director in a two-year-old company improvises without a rulebook; the same title in a forty-year-old institution defends the rulebook against improvisation. Same job title, opposite job.

    Can I use this to decide whether to keep or let go of a specific person?

    No — that use falls outside what the method supports. The bands are verdicts on the transaction as designed, never on anyone in it. The ranges are a reference point, not a verdict: a gap on one or two parameters is something to explore at interview, not grounds for rejection.

    Do I need NeuroFrame assessment data to use it?

    The tool runs on the eight behavioural scores, so it works with a NeuroFrame results file. Without one you can still use the sample team to see how the arithmetic behaves, or enter estimated scores to test a scenario — just remember that estimated inputs give an estimated coefficient.

    Next