Domains Notes Method Background Standards

Decision-Grade TEA (DG-TEA) Standards Survey

We’re gathering input on the practical implications of implementing decision-grade TEA (DG-TEA) standards. Your responses will help us understand where technical requirements meet institutional realities.

This survey takes approximately 3-5 minutes to complete.

Poll 1: Boundary Strength Test

This tests whether DG-TEA creates meaningful differentiation or just adds paperwork.

If this standard were applied today, which type of analysis would it most likely exclude or downgrade?

Early-stage technology assessments (pre-pilot) Investment pitch decks Internal strategy studies Academic benchmark reproductions None of these would be affected

Poll 2: Pressure Point Mapping

This identifies where institutional realities will push against technical requirements.

In your experience commissioning or reviewing TEA work, where does the most tension arise between what's needed for decisions and what's feasible to document?

Data provenance and quality System boundary definition Market/demand assumptions Time horizon and scaling trajectories Benchmark selection and comparability

Poll 3: Adoption Barrier Diagnosis

This separates technical obstacles from institutional ones.

If your organization considered adopting a decision-grade TEA standard, what would create the most internal resistance?

Timeline impact (analyses take longer) Resource requirements (higher upfront cost) Reduced flexibility (fewer judgment calls) Reviewer accountability (results are auditable) Cultural mismatch (conflicts with current norms)

Optional: About You

Help us understand the context of your responses (optional).

Organization Type (optional) Email (optional, if you'd like to receive results)

Materials and analyses on this site reflect independent research, prior work, and ongoing system-level studies, shared to provide context, clarity, and methodological transparency. Select analyses may also be produced as independent, fixed-scope professional deliverables upon request. No institutional endorsement is implied.