Align engineering work to
business outcomes.
Alignment measures, in performance, how much each team contributed to each priority. Week by week, repo by repo. It is the honest answer to the question every leadership meeting eventually asks: “Are we actually on track?”
AI copilot
5 teams contributing · started Jan 14, 2026 · 12 weeks of signal.
| Team | Avg share | Δ first → last |
|---|---|---|
| Search | 8.6% | +2.8pp |
| Identity | 5.5% | +6.5pp |
| Payments | 6% | +1pp |
| Infra | 4.8% | -4.5pp |
| Mobile | 2.2% | 0pp |
From commits to priorities, with no self-reports in between.
Navigara reads every commit, classifies the intent, and tags the priority it actually moved. Then it cross-checks the issue tracker to surface what shipped without ever being tracked.
The signal you walk into the boardroom with comes directly from the repo. Nothing passed through a standup claim on the way there.
Your code never leaves your servers. We measure outcomes, not activity.
The CEO names the priorities. Navigara shows who moved them.
Pick a priority. See how much of each team’s output went to it this quarter, broken down by week. Drift is visible two weeks in. Trade-offs are visible before they become arguments. The team you thought was on the AI copilot, but spent six weeks on infra cleanup, is now accountable to the same record everyone else is reading.
Every number is derived from what shipped, not what was claimed in standup.
- Performance share against each priority, by team
- Weekly granularity, quarter over quarter
- Drill into any cell to see the underlying PRs
- Compare against last quarter or against the team's own forecast
Pick a feature. See what kind of work it actually cost.
Features cost time, and every engineering leader knows this. What most have never seen is what kind of time: growth, maintenance, or fixes, and how that split has changed quarter over quarter without anyone calling it out.
Drag the slider through history and watch the shape change. The first time you run this on a live feature, you will see something you suspected and could not prove until now.
- Growth, maintenance, and fixes per feature
- Retroactive across the feature's full history
- Compare features against each other and against the org average
- Surface features quietly bleeding the team
- Growthnew capabilities, surfaces, integrations62%+8pp
- Maintenancerefactors, dependency upgrades, infra28%-5pp
- Fixesbugs, regressions, edge cases10%-3pp
vs. Q4 2025 baseline · click any row to see contributing PRs
What you can walk into a room and say on Monday.
- Walk in with the share each priority actually received, not the share estimated in the planning doc
- Tell the CEO the AI copilot got 11% of org output and you need 25% to hit the roadmap date, and back it with evidence
- Catch a team drifting into maintenance two weeks in, not two months in
- Run a quarterly retro on what shipped, not on how people felt about what shipped
Run alignment
on your data.
Connect your repos. Name your priorities. Navigara measures who shipped what against them, week by week.
If the numbers surprise you, we should talk.