The Tactical Data Company

Select a layer and click Run Analysis

Run an analysis to see
network insights here.

Metric Glossary

Click any node to see their individual profile. These metrics explain what the network data means for your organisation.

Connectivity: How well-linked the organisation is. High connectivity reduces the risk of information silos and ensures decisions reach the right people quickly.
Brokerage: Identifies individuals who act as bridges between groups. Critical for cross-functional collaboration — removing key brokers risks fragmenting information flow across the firm.
Siloing Risk: Measures how isolated different teams have become. A high score suggests the organisation has fragmented into self-contained groups, which can slow decision-making and impede knowledge-sharing.
Influence: Captures whose advice carries the most weight. A highly influential person is connected to other well-connected colleagues — their judgement carries disproportionate authority regardless of formal title.
Information Speed: The average number of steps needed to pass information between any two people. Shorter paths mean faster communication and more agile decision-making.
Status Inconsistency: Measures the gap between a lawyer's formal seniority and the respect they receive in the advice network. Reveals hidden influencers and underutilised senior talent.
Community Detection: Groups of people who interact more with each other than with the rest of the firm. Communities often align with practice areas, office locations, or informal interest groups.

The Composite Influence Score identifies the true all-rounders in the network — individuals who score highly across all three core centrality dimensions simultaneously. Betweenness captures information brokerage, PageRank captures sustainable peer influence, and Closeness captures strategic reach. A high composite score signals someone whose departure would simultaneously reduce information flow, lower collective influence, and increase average path lengths across the organisation.

#	Name	Score	Role	Seniority	Practice Area	Office	Hub	Authority

These individuals act as bridges between different teams. They control the flow of information and are critical for preventing organisational silos. Removing a key gatekeeper can fragment the network overnight.

#	Name	Score	Details

This metric measures sustainable, organisation-wide influence. It highlights individuals who are critical to the flow of information, whilst mathematically correcting for 'knowledge hoarders' who receive advice but rarely pass it on.

#	Name	Score	Details

Measures the volume of direct day-to-day interactions. High scorers maintain the broadest active relationships across the organisation and are well-placed for rapid communication or policy rollouts.

#	Name	Score	Details

This metric reveals the dual nature of influence in the network. Subject Experts (Authorities) are the deep knowledge centres frequently sought out for answers. Knowledge Navigators (Hubs) are the essential connectors who might not hold the answers themselves, but efficiently route people to the exact experts who do.

Subject Experts — Authority Score

#	Name	Score	Details

Knowledge Navigators — Hub Score

#	Name	Score	Details

Band	Score Range	Organisational Diagnosis
Low	< 10%	Fragmented: The network is disconnected. Risk of isolation, poor knowledge sharing, and weak company culture. Collaboration happens only in small, isolated pockets.
Optimal	10% – 30%	Balanced: A healthy mix of cohesion and autonomy. Sufficient connectivity for trust and efficient communication, without bogging individuals down in constant meetings or emails.
High	> 30%	Over-connected: Risk of collaborative overload and burnout. Too many people are involved in too many things, often leading to consensus-paralysis and a lack of deep, focused work.

Band	Score Range	Organisational Diagnosis
Low	< 2.0	Hyper-responsive: Information travels instantly. Excellent for crisis management and rapid adaptation. However, it can indicate a lack of formal structure or a highly reactive environment where rumours spread as quickly as facts.
Optimal	2.0 – 3.0	Efficient: Standard for a well-functioning hierarchy or matrix. Leadership is accessible, and information cascades efficiently without skipping necessary management layers.
High	> 3.0	Bureaucratic: Information flows are sluggish. The front line is likely disconnected from leadership, causing strategic misalignment and delayed decision-making.

Band	Score Range	Organisational Diagnosis
Low	< 15%	Homogeneous: Weak team boundaries. While very unified, the organisation may lack specialised, focused work groups. Everyone talks to everyone, but deep, domain-specific expertise might not be forming naturally.
Optimal	15% – 40%	Focused but Integrated: Teams have strong internal identities and focus heavily on their specific functions, but they maintain enough cross-boundary “bridge” connections to collaborate effectively with other departments.
High	> 40%	Entrenched Silos: Severe lack of cross-functional collaboration. High risk of an “us versus them” mentality, duplicated efforts, and hoarded information.

Band	Pattern	Organisational Diagnosis
Low	Fewer than formal departments	Blurring Boundaries: Formal departmental boundaries are blurring in practice. This can be highly innovative — cross-functional merging — or a sign that the formal organisational chart is obsolete.
Optimal	Matches formal departments (e.g., 3–5)	Aligned: The informal network aligns perfectly with the formal structure. People collaborate exactly as management designed them to.
High	Highly fractured (e.g., 10+ micro-clusters)	Fragmented into Cliques: The organisation is heavily segmented. This often requires central leadership intervention to build a unifying culture or create deliberate cross-functional project teams.

North American Law Firm Analysis

Organisational Network Analysis — Advice, Friendship & Collaboration