thrive at work/The evidence base

PROOF

See what engagement alone cannot.

Four layers of evidence, from 140+ peer-reviewed papers to a benchmark in every market, show what’s sustainable, where people are depleted and what to address next.

01
Literature review

We read everything. Then we asked what makes a person thrive.

More than 140 peer-reviewed papers across physiology, psychology, occupational health and longevity science. The same eight things kept coming up.

0+peer-reviewed papers
Physiology · the body
Energy & VitalityFuel

Physical energy is the fuel. Everything else costs less to do when it is there.

Recovery & SleepRepair

The body restores itself overnight. Recovery is how yesterday stops following you.

Focus & AttentionControl

A rested brain filters noise and holds attention on what matters.

Resilience & CalmBuffer

A well-regulated nervous system returns to calm after pressure.

Psychology · the mind
Purpose & MeaningDirection

People sustain effort for work that matters to them.

Leadership & TrustSafety

Trust lowers the sense of threat and frees people to contribute.

Connection & BelongingBelonging

Humans are social. Feeling part of a team protects wellbeing.

Growth & EnablementProgress

Learning and the right support turn effort into achievement.

What it gave usThe Thrive Index framework: two indices, eight domains.
02
Expert studies

Then we tested it with the people who use it.

Focus groups and studies with HR leaders, CEOs, scientists, doctors and psychologists. Each was asked the question that matters to them.

HRHR leadersCan your team act on this?Input onHow results turn into action.
CEOCEOsDoes it speak to performance?Input onPlain business wording.
SciScientistsIs the method sound?Input onStatement wording and method.
DrDoctorsDoes it reflect health?Input onThe physiology behind capacity.
PsyPsychologistsIs it clear and fair to answer?Input onClear, behavior-based statements.
What it gave usWhat we measure, and how each result turns into action.
03
Biomarker research

Then we looked at the body. Capacity questions follow physiology.

The capacity statements are informed by biomarker and physiological research. It is development-stage work, and the assessment itself collects no biomarker, wearable or other biometric data.

Physiology researchwhat the body shows
Draft statementworded to reflect it
Reviewread against the research
Refinekeep what fits

Development-stage research. The assessment collects no biomarker, wearable or other biometric data.

What it gave usThe capacity statements in the thrive employee assessment.
04
Benchmark database

Then we ran the final 55 statements in every market we operate in.

One assessment, about 12 minutes, the same statements everywhere. The answers build a database every organization is measured against.

0statements
0domains
0indices
0Thrive Index
MarketYour organization

Every score sits next to the market benchmark. Illustrative.

What it gave usA market benchmark beside every score.

The results are hard to ignore.

Unless a cell says otherwise, each figure compares the bottom decile of the Thrive Index with the top decile — validation study, n=10,000+.

Advocacy
29→99%
Would recommend their employer.
Near-total separation on an independently measured variable. Promoters climb 9% → 94% — a 155-point eNPS swing (−62 to +93), or 10× more promoters.
Burnout Resilience
15→98%
Not regularly overwhelmed.
6.8× more people are not regularly overwhelmed (15% → 98%). A separate energy measure — not running on empty — rises 17% → 79%, or 4.6×.
Performance
21→98%
Can regularly perform at their best.
4.6× more people can regularly perform at their best (21% → 98%) — the clearest link between the Index and output.
The capacity gap
10 pts
Engagement runs ahead of capacity.
By up to 10 points, a gap that comes before visible burnout.
Leadership cascade
67.7→79.4
Thrive rises with every manager layer.
By management layer, not decile: 67.7 for individual contributors, 73.7 for managers, 79.4 for managers of managers — monotonic across all three levels.
Leadership cascade · eNPS
−1→+63
A 64-point climb with seniority.
By management layer, not decile: −1 for individual contributors, +33 for managers, +63 for managers of managers — the same cascade, on advocacy.

Source: thrive at work validation study · bottom vs. top decile of the Thrive Index

Research & insights

The numbers, opened up.

Request the full library →
Scientific foundation

The scientists who define these fields.

Every statement maps to published research from named scientists working at the frontier of sleep, stress physiology, exercise science, attention, and the psychology of workplace demands. This is the shortlist — the full reference list runs to 140+ papers.

Sleep & Recovery
Matthew WalkerUC Berkeley
Center for Human Sleep Science
Russell FosterOxford
Sleep & Circadian Institute
Charles CzeislerHarvard Medical
Division of Sleep Medicine
Satchin PandaSalk Institute
Regulatory Biology
Stress & Resilience
Christina MaslachUC Berkeley
Burnout research lead
Elizabeth BlackburnUCSF
Nobel Laureate, telomere biology
Robert SapolskyStanford
Stress physiology
Bruce McEwenRockefeller
Allostatic load
Engagement & Culture
Amy EdmondsonHarvard Business School
Psychological safety
Adam GrantWharton
Organizational psychology
Teresa AmabileHarvard Business School
Progress principle
Daniel CableLondon Business School
Meaning & identity
Focus & Attention
Michael PosnerUniv. of Oregon
Attention networks
Adam GazzaleyUCSF
Neuroscape
Amishi JhaUniv. of Miami
Attention & working memory
Gloria MarkUC Irvine
Attention & interruption
Energy & Movement
Wendy SuzukiNYU
Exercise & the brain
Charles HillmanNortheastern
Activity & cognition
Daniel LiebermanHarvard
Evolutionary biology of exercise
Ulrik WisløffNTNU
Cardiorespiratory fitness
Growth & Motivation
Carol DweckStanford
Growth mindset
Angela DuckworthUniv. of Pennsylvania
Grit & perseverance
Richard RyanRochester
Self-determination theory
Edward DeciRochester
Intrinsic motivation
Common questions

The evidence, answered.

Is the Thrive Index evidence-based?
Yes. Every statement is derived from peer-reviewed research and maps back to a published instrument — nothing is invented for the assessment. The result is an instrument built on established science, not opinion.
How do you know the questions actually work?
The instrument has been tested across multiple labor markets and validated against how people actually perform — then linked to objective physical markers of sleep, stress, recovery and energy. We only keep a question when it proves it measures something real.
Are capacity and engagement really distinct?
Yes. They measure genuinely different things — how people feel about their work versus what they can physically give to it. Capacity carries its own signal for performance and retention that an engagement-only survey simply can't see.

Every figure on this page traces back to a paper or a dataset. Those sources, the cited data sets and the practical guides built on them are collected in our research and guides.

Ready to unlock your people’s
capacity to perform?

Start the change today.

Perform better.
Feel better.
Live better.
Book a demo