Every category where a model named WorkBoard 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.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Goals and OKRs	Performance and talent management	2%	11 of 54	27%	26	criticized challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for WorkBoard 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 WorkBoard across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	2	0	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	2	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	2	2	4
Mistral Small	0	1	1	0	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	3	1	4
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1	1	1	4
Kimi K2	0	1	0	2	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	1	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	1	1

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

Direct15 labels5

Paraphrase12 labels5

Comparative16 labels5not counted in share

Budget-constrained10 labels1

Scale-constrained10 labels3

Negative21 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative84 labels in all, every segment counted; 14 of the 19 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.

“Choose WorkBoard/Gtmhub if you are a data-driven B2B firm where strict alignment between Sales, Product, and C-Suite is the highest priority.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Goals and OKRs · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“AI-native and enterprise-grade tools like Tability and WorkBoard are best for advanced needs” Mistral Small · Goals and OKRs · comparative prompt · alternative

“heavyweight champion of corporate strategy alignment... requires hands-on sales onboarding” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Goals and OKRs · comparative prompt · alternative

“needs deep transparency across multiple departments, Workboard is often the go-to” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Goals and OKRs · direct 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.

“powerful but enterprise-oriented — pricing runs high” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Goals and OKRs · paraphrase prompt · hard negative

“Some enterprise-grade platforms (e.g., advanced modules of WorkBoard, certain SAP or Oracle implementations) are powerful but often described as "overpowered" for growing companies.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Goals and OKRs · negative prompt · soft negative

“Consideration: Higher price point, may be overpowered for smaller teams” MiniMax M2.5 · Goals and OKRs · direct prompt · soft negative

“Tools like WorkBoard (pre-acquisition echoes) buried users in complexity.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Goals and OKRs · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as WorkBoard, over the 84 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and WorkBoard was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Profit.co54 of 845Not among the top eight

Betterworks53 of 8410Not among the top eight

Lattice49 of 841Not among the top eight

Perdoo43 of 847Not among the top eight

Quantive41 of 840Not among the top eight

Tability35 of 8414Not among the top eight

Mooncamp35 of 848Not among the top eight

15Five22 of 840Not among the top eight

Weekdone20 of 842Not among the top eight

Microsoft Viva Goals19 of 840Not 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 WorkBoard. 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 71 of the 84 answers that named WorkBoard and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

tability.io58

okrstool.com50

mooncamp.com47

profit.co38

topickz.com29

workboard.comYour site28

toolradar.com25

worxmate.ai25

betterworks.com19

teamflect.com19

310 of the 338 domain citations in answers naming WorkBoard came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

mooncamp.com/blog/best-okr-software42

tability.io/odt/articles/best-okr-software-for-enterprise40

profit.co/blog/okr-university/enterprise-okr-software-comparison-top-8-platforms-reviewed31

toolradar.com/guides/best-okr-software25

tability.io/odt/articles/best-okr-software23

okrstool.com/blog/best-okr-software19

topickz.com/list/best-okr-software-for-enterprise19

gartner.com/reviews/market/okr-software17

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as WorkBoard

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as WorkBoard; a claim can dispute any of them.

Workboard 7WorkBoard (Quantive) 1

Follow WorkBoard

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 WorkBoard'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 WorkBoard, 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 WorkBoard by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where WorkBoard 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 WorkBoard, 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 workboard.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.