Vizuna vs Relate
Vizuna vs Relate
Both use the Trust Equation. Relate scores trust from meeting behaviour. Vizuna measures trust through private colleague reflections and self-assessments — no call recording, no surveillance.
How is Vizuna different from Relate? Vizuna measures professional trust through source-protected colleague reflections using the Trust Equation (Credibility, Reliability, Safety, Selflessness), while Relate focuses on meeting trust analytics. Vizuna provides continuous, private measurement rather than periodic reviews.
- No meeting recording or transcript analysis — reflections are voluntary and private
- Measures trust in all interactions, not just meetings
- Self-reflection habit builds self-awareness — with optional colleague feedback where enabled
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | Relate | Vizuna |
|---|---|---|
| Data source | Meeting transcripts + behavioural signals | Source-protected colleague reflections + self-assessments |
| Privacy model | Analyses call content (opt-in) | No call/content monitoring — voluntary reflections only |
| Coverage | Meeting interactions only | All professional interactions (meetings, async, 1:1) |
| Framework | Trust Equation (original formulation) | Trust Equation (CRSS) — Safety in place of Intimacy |
| Output | Trust Index score per meeting | Trust trends over time + suggested Actions |
| Self-awareness | Passive (AI observes) | Active (self-reflection + colleague feedback) |
Trust-by-design, not by policy
Vizuna is designed to keep organisation-facing reporting aggregate and source-protected, without turning trust into surveillance.
No names. No ranking.
Organisation-facing reporting is designed to reduce attribution risk and avoid linking trends back to one person.
Aggregated, not attributed.
Signals appear only after combining multiple colleague perspectives.
Patterns, not people.
The system is built to prevent monitoring or employee ranking.
Common concerns — and the reality
"This could expose leadership weaknesses."
Unmeasured trust doesn’t protect leaders. It only delays the moment they lose credibility.
"People will game the system."
Gaming is itself a signal of low trust. Well-designed systems surface this behaviour rather than conceal it.
"This won’t work in our culture."
Culture doesn’t reject trust. It rejects inconsistency and hypocrisy.
Ready to measure trust more directly than meeting trust analytics?