From skills-for-humanity
Analyzes group psychology in teams or discussions — detecting groupthink, status dynamics, coalition formation, and psychological safety. Useful for diagnosing team dysfunctions or meeting dynamics.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/skills-for-humanity:s4h-social-dynamics-analysisThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Groups develop collective behaviours that are invisible from inside them. Premature consensus, status-based deference, and psychological unsafety all degrade decision quality — and they are self-reinforcing. Naming the dynamic is the first step to changing it.
Groups develop collective behaviours that are invisible from inside them. Premature consensus, status-based deference, and psychological unsafety all degrade decision quality — and they are self-reinforcing. Naming the dynamic is the first step to changing it.
Step 1: Observe or Recall Group Behaviour Work from specific, concrete instances of how the group acts — not general impressions. What actually happened in the last meeting or decision? What was said? What was not said?
Framing check: Confirm the specific group and context before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual group being analyzed and the situation or event in focus — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
Step 2: Check for Groupthink Signals
Step 3: Assess Status Dynamics Who speaks most, and does speaking time correlate with expertise or with seniority? Who is deferred to regardless of subject matter? Whose ideas get attributed to someone else? Status often drives decisions more than merit.
Step 4: Assess Psychological Safety Do people raise concerns, admit uncertainty, and challenge ideas — or do they signal alignment and hedge? Rate: high / medium / low.
Step 5: Identify Coalition Patterns Are subgroups forming? Are decisions being pre-made outside formal meetings? Are there recurring alliances or persistent tensions?
Step 6: Name the Dominant Dynamic
Before narrowing: Show all dynamics surfaced across the previous steps. Use AskUserQuestion:
Which single dynamic is most affecting decision quality right now? That is where intervention has the highest leverage.
Before proceeding, use the AskUserQuestion tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
| Signal | Present / Absent | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Premature consensus | ... | ... |
| Self-censorship | ... | ... |
| Illusion of unanimity | ... | ... |
| Pressure on dissenters | ... | ... |
| No contingency planning | ... | ... |
Describe who dominates, who defers, and where status overrides expertise.
Rating: High / Medium / Low Evidence: Specific behaviours supporting this rating.
Dominant dynamic: [Name it clearly] Recommended intervention: [Specific, concrete action to shift the dynamic]
Run this before a high-stakes decision or after a meeting that felt wrong but hard to name. The intervention should be structural where possible — changing the process, not asking people to behave differently.
After delivering this output, use AskUserQuestion to offer the next move:
/s4h-social-power-mapping — Map power relationships within the dynamics/s4h-social-incentive-analysis — Analyse what's driving the dynamics/s4h-strategy-positioning — Position relative to the social dynamicsnpx claudepluginhub human-avatar/skills-for-humanityRoutes social and organizational reasoning queries to the appropriate skill: coalition-mapping, dynamics-analysis, incentive-analysis, or power-mapping. Use for group dynamics, power structures, and stakeholder alignment.
Assesses and improves team psychological safety using Edmondson's 7-item survey and evidence-based leader behaviors. For team leads wanting to increase speaking up, admitting mistakes, and productive disagreement.
Assesses and improves dev team effectiveness using psychological safety, dependability, clarity, meaning, and impact model. Includes health checks for collaboration, dysfunction, inclusivity, and culture.