# Profile Comparison Report Template

Copy and fill this template when comparing two Culture Index profiles for compatibility analysis.

---

## Profile Comparison: [Person A] & [Person B]

**Date:** [Date]
**Relationship:** [Peers / Manager-Report / Cross-functional / etc.]

### Profile Overview

| Trait | Person A | Person B | Gap | Same Side? |
|-------|----------|----------|-----|------------|
| Pattern | [Archetype] | [Archetype] | - | - |
| A | [±X from arrow] | [±X from arrow] | [diff] | [Y/N] |
| B | [±X from arrow] | [±X from arrow] | [diff] | [Y/N] |
| C | [±X from arrow] | [±X from arrow] | [diff] | [Y/N] |
| D | [±X from arrow] | [±X from arrow] | [diff] | [Y/N] |
| L | [absolute] | [absolute] | [diff] | - |
| I | [absolute] | [absolute] | [diff] | - |

### Compatibility Assessment

| Factor | Score | Notes |
|--------|-------|-------|
| Overall Pattern Match | [High/Medium/Low] | [patterns similar or complementary?] |
| A Alignment | [High/Medium/Low] | [collaboration vs independence] |
| B Alignment | [High/Medium/Low] | [social energy match] |
| C Alignment | [High/Medium/Low] | [pace match] |
| D Alignment | [High/Medium/Low] | [detail orientation match] |

### Primary Friction Points

| Trait Gap | Person A Tendency | Person B Tendency | Friction |
|-----------|-------------------|-------------------|----------|
| [Trait] | [behavior] | [behavior] | [friction description] |
| [Trait] | [behavior] | [behavior] | [friction description] |

### Primary Alignment Points

| Trait | Person A | Person B | Alignment |
|-------|----------|----------|-----------|
| [Trait] | [behavior] | [behavior] | [why compatible] |
| [Trait] | [behavior] | [behavior] | [why compatible] |

### How They Likely See Each Other

**Person A sees Person B as:**
- [Perception based on trait gap]
- [Perception based on trait gap]

**Person B sees Person A as:**
- [Perception based on trait gap]
- [Perception based on trait gap]

### Collaboration Recommendations

**For [Person A]:**
1. [Adjustment to make when working with Person B]
2. [Adjustment to make when working with Person B]

**For [Person B]:**
1. [Adjustment to make when working with Person A]
2. [Adjustment to make when working with Person A]

**Process/Environment Changes:**
1. [Process change to reduce friction]
2. [Process change to reduce friction]

### Optimal Working Arrangement

| Aspect | Recommendation | Why |
|--------|----------------|-----|
| Meeting frequency | [recommendation] | [based on C and B traits] |
| Communication channel | [recommendation] | [based on B traits] |
| Decision-making | [recommendation] | [based on A traits] |
| Quality review | [recommendation] | [based on D traits] |

### Complementary Strengths

When paired effectively, this combination can:
1. [Complementary strength 1]
2. [Complementary strength 2]

### Watch Areas

When stressed or misaligned:
1. [Potential breakdown area]
2. [Potential breakdown area]

### Summary

**Overall Compatibility:** [High/Medium/Low]

**Key Takeaway:** [1-2 sentence summary of the relationship dynamics]

**Action Required:** [None/Process adjustment/Active management/Intervention]

---

*Compatibility analysis based on trait gap assessment. Opposite traits create friction but also complementary strengths. Same-side traits create easy rapport but potential blind spots.*
