AI Indexes
HR AI Index
Index › Products › SuccessionStack · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Ranked

SuccessionStack

25Judge labels
3First choices
0Negative labels
10 of 12Models named it
1Category
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.3, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
4% in Succession planning for mid-market buyers
Rank 7 of 99 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
2 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 14 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of SuccessionStack →
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In succession planning · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named SuccessionStack for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Succession planningPerformance and talent management4%7 of 990%14accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for SuccessionStack yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated SuccessionStack across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500000
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash00000
Perplexity Sonar00101
Grok 4.1 Fast01102
Mistral Small01001
DeepSeek V4 Flash02002
Llama 4 Maverick01102
Qwen 3.7 Flash01001
Kimi K211002
GLM 4.7 FlashX12003
MiniMax M2.500000

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct9 labels2
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative8 labelsNone
Budget-constrained7 labels1
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative25 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“If succession planning is a strategic priority and you want best-in-class depth without enterprise complexity → SuccessionStack” Kimi K2 · Succession planning · direct prompt · first choice
“Engagedly, Lattice, Dayforce, or SuccessionStack strike the best balance of functionality, usability, and pricing” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Succession planning · direct prompt · first choice
“if you want succession as the entire product, choose a dedicated tool (SuccessionStack, TalentGuard, SuccessionNow)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Succession planning · comparative prompt · alternative
“For a truly limited budget with \u226420 employees: Start with SuccessionStack\u2019s free templates” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Succession planning · budget prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SuccessionStack, over the 25 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SuccessionStack was named but was not.
ShowHide
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
SAP SuccessFactors10 of 251Not among the top eight
Leapsome8 of 250Not among the top eight
Cornerstone OnDemand7 of 250Not among the top eight
PeopleFluent7 of 250Not among the top eight
Workday7 of 250Not among the top eight
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named SuccessionStack. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 24 of the 25 answers that named SuccessionStack and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

successionstack.comYour site24
talentguard.com20
firsthr.app18
engagedly.com14
gartner.com12
guideflow.com12
softwareadvice.com11
monday.com10
worldmetrics.org10
skillpanel.com8

115 of the 139 domain citations in answers naming SuccessionStack came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow SuccessionStack

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when SuccessionStack's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as SuccessionStack, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

With a new claim: the vendor brief

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for SuccessionStack by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

  • where SuccessionStack is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
  • the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
  • its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
  • who was chosen in the answers that did not name SuccessionStack, and every reason the record gives;
  • a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
  • one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at successionstack.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.

Subscribe to the pack