Mapping Horizontal Responsibility to Strengths

In my Part 3 of thinking about horizontal management bundles, I’m wondering about how we can think about them in relation to folks’ talents.

Many of us took the Clifton Strengths assessment last year as part of our offsite workshop (And if you haven’t and want to, ping Erika for a code).

I’m not a Clifton expert, so I just asked my friend Claude to map the 16 responsibilities to talents and here’s what Claude thinks:

How the 16 responsibility areas from your document generally align with the 34 Clifton Strengths themes:

Executing Domain

• Leadership → Activator, Command, Self-Assurance
• Management → Arranger, Discipline, Focus, Responsibility
• Resource stewardship → Deliberative, Prudence
• Quality assurance → Consistency, Discipline

Influencing Domain

• External representation → Communication, Woo, Maximizer
• Decision-making authority → Command, Self-Assurance, Significance
• Culture building → Positivity, Developer, Includer
• Partnership development → Relator, Woo, Communication

Relationship Building Domain

• Supervision → Developer, Individualization, Empathy
• Conflict resolution → Harmony, Empathy, Relator
• Mentoring → Developer, Individualization, Empathy
• Information brokering → Connectedness, Relator, Communication

Strategic Thinking Domain

• Technical/Domain ownership → Learner, Intellection, Context
• Innovation/Improvement → Ideation, Strategic, Futuristic
• Strategic planning → Strategic, Analytical, Futuristic
• Risk assessment → Analytical, Deliberative, Context
• Resource acquisition → Strategic, Achiever, Competition

I think what this sort of gets at is that no matter your talents, you can execute these responsibilities in your own way. What do you think? How can we bring in a discussion of our talents to this system of thinking about responsibilities?

Metrics

Traction

• Unique Buildings: 6,794 (Jul, +68 MoM)
• Annual Run Rate: $1.66M

Financials

• Monthly net burn (accrual basis): -$35,793, -27.02% MoM
• Year-to-last-month net burn (cash basis): -$68,000, -5.78% MoM
• 2025 Transaction fees to date: $30,478
• Outstanding invoices as of today: $218,133

Development

• Bug Count (P-0 and P-1): 3, 1 or 2 of which should be closed with the next release

Last Week’s Highs and Lows

• No less than four patches this week on the tail of Release 100, and at the end of the road key fixes implemented and more resilience to EPA PM issues that were putting data quality at risk. (FH)
• The initial conversations with Mathieu (Laravel Architect consultant) about the state of our code base are encouraging, looking forward to specific recommendations as next steps. (FH)
• Having more specific hiring discussions and reviewing job descriptions mean we’re getting closer to growing! (JB)
• I had a good discussion with folks from NYSERDA and their program evaluator about our role in the SAFE project. That project is focused on DHW electrification, and they wanted to hear how we’re improving Momentum as a result of it. Beyond that focus though, they really liked what they saw and asked if Momentum could do other things as well–things that are largely on our roadmap in one form or another. It’s great that others see value in what we’re building and see of potential for more! (JB)

Any missing highlights? Please share in Slack comments.

Crow’s Nest

Looking out for icebergs: What are the risks on the horizon that we’re watching for and navigating around?

François’ List

• Defining the contours of back-end as a product: the NYSERDA Building Data Platform (BDP) initiative, the recent L+M analysis work, E3 research for ConEd, HPD, and other opportunities ahead of us have common themes of enabling analysis on large groups of buildings, with data integration and processing at their core. Should we turn this into a product we sell, or are we OK making it a service we offer tactically?
• Making our Code Base more welcoming: staffing is hard, making new folks successful quickly is not easy either. One of the major wins I’m hoping to get from outside senior help (Laravel architect, Senior data engineer, etc) is to help define structures that make it easier for new folks with different profiles to be productive faster and safer.

(repeats with tweaks)

• Growing the team: the NYCA news further raises the priority of onboarding the right talent to help us deliver quickly from data processing to front-end. We’re making progress identifying places where we need the most help, we have a candidate pipeline for data processing and a Laravel architect helping us - but are we ready to welcome new folks and help them be productive?

Erika’s List

• Growing the team and making sure we have the capacity to onboard and manage additional hires.
• 2026 budget we continue to look at where we are mid-year and when we will break even, but also need to keep an eye toward what this will look like from an overall operating budget perspective. October is when the following year’s budget is usually set and we some pieces that need to connect by then (mainly hiring budget).

Jason’s List

Carryovers:

• We need to move faster, and I hope we can grow the team and integrate more people quickly and smoothly!
• We’ve increased our feature set quite a bit lately, and it’s going to continue growing for some time. How can we scale our our testing to keep pace?
• AI Document Scraping How will scraping project scopes and contractor bids, which will be more difficult, go? And how quickly can we get this figured out and incorporated into the code? This is one of the areas where we can provide some real magic for users.
• Local politics There’s still a lot that could happen between now and the general election in November. NYC DOB is worried about the optics of this first year of LL97 filing and wants to make sure it goes smoothly and offers a positive takeaway.
• NYC Accelerator news is in! 🎉 We have a lot of build for this–and I realize more with each passing day–so I’m hoping our team continues to incorporate the new tools and processes, and remains vocal and open about what they are working on and what’s not working for them.
• ConEd Recompete Still waiting for news
• Portfolio/program reporting Users want the ability to look at groups of buildings in our software, whether it’s looking in their own collections for buildings that meet certain criteria or looking at trends across projects in a program. We haven’t done anything in this vein yet, but we’ll need to start. L+M, CFHF, FirstService, and more want and expect this set of features from us. And we’re starting to learn what jobs they are looking to do with the spreadsheets we’re providing so far.

On Deck for This Week

• Release 101
• Maksym’s 360

• Here’s what’s on the Company Radar

Upcoming Release

• Projects updates, including generating SOW requirements documents and other UI/UX improvements
• Performance and bug fixes

Please Leave Feedback

Please note your reaction to this update in the Slack channel. It helps us to know what is resonating, what is unclear, etc. Thanks!

• What are your highlights / low-lights?
• Did we miss a highlight? Something else you want to react to?