# Summit > Map defines skills. Pathway charts individual routes. Outpost handles daily > ops. But none of them answer the question engineering leaders ask most often: > "Does this team have the capability to deliver what we need?" Summit makes > that visible — not by ranking individuals, but by modelling the team as a > system with structural properties. ### What you get - **Capability coverage** — per-skill headcount at working+ across the team. - **Structural risks** — single points of failure, critical gaps, concentration risks. - **What-if scenarios** — simulate add / remove / move / promote before acting. - **Growth alignment** — connect team gaps to individual development opportunities. - **Compare** — diff two teams' coverage and risks side by side. - **Trajectory** — quarterly capability evolution from git history of your roster file. Requires the roster file to be tracked in a git repository with commits spanning the period you want to analyze. - **Roster / validate** — show the team layout Summit sees and check it against your Map agent-aligned engineering standard. Optional enhancements (require Map's activity layer): - `--evidenced` — compares derived coverage against practiced capability from Map's evidence data. - `--outcomes` — weights growth recommendations by GetDX driver scores. Without these flags, Summit is fully local and instant — Map data plus a roster. --- ### Who it's for **Engineering leaders** staffing teams and planning hires. Summit shows whether a team has the capability to deliver — and what composition changes would close gaps. **Tech leads** managing risk. Know which skills depend on a single person and where cross-training would have the most impact. **Engineers in 1:1s** aligning personal growth with team needs. See which skills the team needs most and where your development can make the biggest difference. --- ## Three Views ### Capability Coverage For each skill in the agent-aligned engineering standard, Summit computes the team's collective proficiency by aggregating individual skill matrices derived through Pathway. ``` $ npx fit-summit coverage platform platform team — 3 members Capability: Delivery Planning ░░░░░░░░░░ gap — no engineers at working+ Task Completion ██████████ depth: 1 engineer at working+ Capability: Reliability Incident Response ░░░░░░░░░░ gap — no engineers at working+ ``` For project teams with allocation, coverage reports allocation-weighted effective depth: ``` $ npx fit-summit coverage --project migration-q2 migration-q2 project — 3 members (2.0 FTE) Capability: Delivery Task Completion ██████████ effective depth: 1.6 at working+ ``` ### Structural Risks Summit identifies single points of failure, critical gaps, and concentration risks — structural facts about team composition, not judgments about individuals. ``` $ npx fit-summit risks platform platform team — structural risks Single points of failure: task_completion — only Bob holds working level [low] Critical gaps: planning — no engineer at working level supporting skill for software_engineering discipline. incident_response — no engineer at working level broad skill for software_engineering discipline. ``` The severity tag on single points of failure reflects the engineer's allocation to the team: **high** when allocation is below 0.5 (less than half-time), **medium** between 0.5 and 1.0 (part-time), and **low** at 1.0 (full-time). In reporting teams where members default to full allocation, every SPOF shows `[low]`. The tag differentiates in project teams where partial allocation makes a single point of failure more acute. ### What-If Scenarios Simulate roster changes and see their impact before anyone makes a decision. Adding an engineer may resolve existing risks, but can also introduce new ones (for example, two engineers at the same level creates a concentration risk in skills neither covers at working+). Summit shows both directions: ``` $ npx fit-summit what-if platform --add "{ discipline: software_engineering, level: J060 }" Adding software_engineering J060 to platform: Capability changes: + task_completion depth: 1 → 2 Risk changes: - task_completion no longer single point of failure + incident_response concentration risk: 2 engineers, none at working+ ``` `-` lines are risks resolved by the change. `+` lines are risks the change introduces. A hire that looks straightforwardly positive can still surface second-order gaps — Summit shows both so you can make the decision with the full picture. --- ## Design Principles **Teams are systems, not collections.** A team's capability depends on coverage, depth distribution, redundancy, and complementarity — not the sum of individual scores. **Plan forward, don't measure backward.** Landmark looks at past evidence. Summit looks ahead: what can this team do today, and what could it do with different composition? **No external dependencies required.** Core Summit uses only Map data and a team roster. The `--evidenced` and `--outcomes` flags are opt-in enhancements that read Map's activity layer; without them Summit runs fully locally, instantly, deterministically. **Capability, not performance.** Summit describes what a team _can_ do based on its skill profile — not how well it's doing it. A planning tool, not a monitoring tool. **Privacy through aggregation.** The team view shows collective coverage, not individual shortcomings. When Summit identifies a gap, it's a team gap — a structural fact about composition. The `--audience director` flag strips individual names entirely from cross-team planning views. --- ## Getting Started ```sh npm install @forwardimpact/summit npx fit-summit coverage platform --roster ./summit.yaml npx fit-summit risks platform --roster ./summit.yaml ```
### Leadership Create a roster, model team capability, run what-if staffing scenarios, and track trajectory over time.