whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Talent Management

Lattice

Rest of world Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by Degree, Inc. · lattice.com

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

Lattice: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Lattice: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds. The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.

Lattice at a glance

Vendor
Degree, Inc.
Headquarters
Incorporated in United States source, captured 28 Oct 2026
Data hosting
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 28 Oct 2026
Free plan
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 28 Oct 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates Lattice 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Lattice is a modular talent management suite from Degree, Inc. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 1 Oct 2026 to 28 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 29 Oct 2026. all sources

Lattice alternatives, European ones first →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The HR IT Integrator

Weighted verdict

Connects the tool to the HR system and the identity provider and will be asked for the data when the contract ends. Wants org chart and manager relations synced from the HRIS, SSO and SCIM, a documented API, and a full export of reviews and goals rather than one PDF per person.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The HR IT Integrator

Panel median The HR IT Integrator This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.
Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion Panel median The HR IT Integrator
Performance reviews & calibration 3 of 5 3 of 5
Goals, OKRs & continuous feedback 3 of 5 3 of 5
Learning, skills & succession 3 of 5 3 of 5
Works council, visibility & AI disclosure 1.5 of 5 1.5 of 5
HRIS sync, integrations & data portability 1.5 of 5 1.5 of 5
European sovereignty 1 of 5 1 of 5
Pricing transparency 3 of 5 3 of 5

Performance reviews & calibration

How this is scored

The review cycle itself: configurable templates and rating scales, self, manager and 360° input, calibration across teams, and whether each rating can be traced back to criteria fixed before the cycle began.

0 — No performance reviews; the product does not run review cycles.

3 — Review templates with self and manager input, run as a cycle per employee.

5 — Configurable review cycles, questions and rating scales, self, manager and peer or 360° input, and the review history kept per employee.

8 — 360° feedback with configurable reviewer selection, calibration views across teams with rating distributions, review criteria per role or level, employee sign-off or acknowledgement, and a documented rule for what the employee, the manager and HR can each see.

10 — Reviews are an auditable process: criteria and competency models versioned and fixed before the cycle, every rating change during calibration attributed and reasoned, bias checks or distribution analysis described, and the full review history exportable per employee.

Report an error

The HR IT Integrator

Configurable cycles (annual, quarterly, project-based, automated), templates, workflows, dashboards with mid-cycle adjustments and calibration, and five configurable rating-scale types including numeric and qualitative are documented, with calibration a shipped Performance feature and an AI draft pulling goals, feedback, updates and review history into the review. I found no public information on peer or 360° reviewer selection, rating-distribution views across teams, employee sign-off, or a documented rule for who sees what. 3 7 2 9

Report an error

Goals, OKRs & continuous feedback

How this is scored

The work between review cycles: individual and team goals or OKRs with alignment, progress check-ins, 1:1 meetings with shared agendas, and feedback and recognition — judged on whether the year-end review can draw on it rather than starting from memory.

0 — No goals or feedback features; objectives live in documents outside the product.

3 — Individual goals with progress tracking, and feedback or recognition shared between colleagues.

5 — Goals or OKRs at company, team and individual level with alignment, check-ins or 1:1 meetings with shared agendas, and feedback that can be requested and referenced in the review.

8 — Goal or OKR cascading with dependencies and confidence tracking, goal changes logged with history, 1:1 notes with private and shared parts stated, feedback requests to named colleagues pulled into the next review, and check-ins from Microsoft Teams or Slack.

10 — Continuous performance management that feeds the record: goal history, check-ins, 1:1 outcomes and feedback visible in the review with their dates, configurable whether goal attainment affects ratings, and reporting on goal progress across the organisation.

Report an error

The HR IT Integrator

Cascading goals with progress updates are listed features, 1:1s, Weekly Updates and real-time feedback ship as Manager Tools with the base products, and prompts document requesting feedback from named colleagues and pulling 1:1 notes, action items, goals and updates together. A prompt-library draft draws goals, feedback, updates and review history into the review so it does not start from memory; I found no public information on goal dependencies, confidence tracking, logged goal changes, or check-ins from Microsoft Teams or Slack. 2 9 3

Report an error

Learning, skills & succession

How this is scored

Growing people rather than only rating them: learning paths or course delivery, a skills or competency framework, career paths and development plans, and talent reviews and succession planning for key roles.

0 — No development features; the product rates people and does nothing to develop them.

3 — Development plans per employee with goals or actions, or courses assigned from a catalogue.

5 — Development plans linked to review outcomes, a skills or competency framework, and learning content assigned in the product or through a named LMS integration.

8 — Skills profiles per employee with gaps against role requirements, career paths per role, learning paths with completion tracking and mandatory training, talent reviews (such as a nine-box) with succession plans per key role, and internal mobility shown against open positions.

10 — Development is planned and measured: skills data maintained and versioned, learning outcomes linked to skills and reviews, succession coverage and risk reported per role, SCORM or xAPI content supported or a named LMS integrated both ways, and certificates and training records exportable.

Report an error

The HR IT Integrator

Grow lists Competencies, individual development plans, Career Tracks, 1:1 integration and AI-powered growth areas, Performance ships Talent Reviews and Succession Planning, and the succession-planning tour shows plans created and managed to strengthen the talent bench. I found no public information on skills-gap analysis against role requirements, learning paths with completion tracking, LMS or SCORM support, or internal mobility against open positions. 2 10 1

Report an error

Works council, visibility & AI disclosure

How this is scored

What the employer can put in a works agreement (BetrVG § 87 (1) no. 6, § 94): visibility and access rules per role, anonymity thresholds for surveys and upward feedback, retention and deletion of review data, access logging, and disclosure and control of every AI feature that summarises, scores or suggests ratings.

0 — No access model: review and feedback data are open to every user of the account.

3 — Role-based access to review data, and anonymous surveys or feedback offered with a confidentiality statement.

5 — Visibility rules per role documented, a minimum group size for anonymous results stated, and AI features described by what they do with an option for the admin to switch them off.

8 — Field-level permissions and private versus shared notes stated, a configurable anonymity threshold, access to review data logged, retention or deletion configurable per data type, each AI feature named with its inputs and the model provider, and documentation or templates aimed at works councils or a works agreement.

10 — The vendor publishes what a works agreement needs: a complete list of the data each module processes and who sees it, audit logs exportable, deletion runs reportable, AI features never rating or ranking employees without a human action, the EU AI Act position stated, and EU processing for the AI features.

Report an error

The HR IT Integrator

A privacy policy exists with a named DPO, an EU representative in Dublin and Standard Contractual Clauses, states no automated decision making, and describes the AI features by what they do (feedback analysis in seconds, evidence-backed review drafts), with one prompt's "feedback I'm permitted to view" the only hint of an in-product permission model. That policy states it does not apply to data processed on customers' behalf — exactly the employee data a works agreement covers — and I found no public information on documented visibility rules per role, minimum group sizes for anonymous survey results, access logging, an admin switch for the AI features, or works-council materials. 4 4 8 9

Report an error

HRIS sync, integrations & data portability

How this is scored

How the tool fits next to the system of record and what leaves with the customer: employee and org-chart sync from the HR system, SSO and SCIM, collaboration-tool integrations, an API, and export of the full review, goal and feedback history.

0 — No HR-system integration, no import and no export; employees are maintained by hand and the history stays in the product.

3 — Employees imported by CSV or synced from one HR system, and reviews exported as PDF or spreadsheet.

5 — Maintained sync with named HR systems (e.g. Personio, SAP SuccessFactors, HRworks, BambooHR), SSO, and a documented API or a structured export of review and goal data.

8 — Several named HRIS integrations including org-chart and manager relations, SCIM provisioning, Microsoft Teams or Slack integration, webhooks, an API with published limits, and a bulk export of the complete review, goal and feedback history.

10 — Portability is designed in: a versioned API with a deprecation policy, a documented full export (structured data plus attachments) available at contract end, deletion that propagates to synced systems, and the vendor maintaining the German HRIS integrations itself.

Report an error

The HR IT Integrator

The homepage promises connection to "your favorite HRIS, productivity, and communication tools", the pricing page names Salesforce and Jira integrations, and the MCP server lets an external assistant pull 1:1 notes, action items, active goals, updates and permission-filtered feedback. The captured pages name no specific HR system, and I found no public information on org-chart or manager-relation sync, SSO, SCIM provisioning, a documented API with published limits, or any bulk export of the review, goal and feedback history — what I will be asked for when the contract ends. 1 2 9

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where performance, feedback and survey data lives, who the contracting entity is, and who the subprocessors are — including the AI providers that summarise reviews and feedback. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline. Weighted with the employment relationship in mind: these are judgements about people who did not choose the vendor.

0 — Proven non-EU throughout: non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting outside the EU, and no data processing agreement offered.

3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, while an EU contracting entity and EU hosting are not shown, or EU hosting is an option under a non-EU contracting entity.

5 — EU hosting stated (as standard or selectable) and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, with a data processing agreement; parts of the chain such as AI summaries, email, analytics or support may run outside the EU.

8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessor list published with locations including AI providers, and a DPA that covers employee performance data as the customer's processing.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor European, certification published, and the AI features run within the EU on providers the customer can see.

Report an error

The HR IT Integrator

The privacy policy names Degree, Inc. of San Francisco as controller for EEA users, gives a San Francisco postal address, and states personal information may be processed in the United States and any other country where Lattice or its providers operate, with Standard Contractual Clauses carrying EEA transfers. A DPO contact and an EU representative exist, but hosting location for customer data, the subprocessor list including any AI providers, and a data processing agreement are not shown publicly, so the chain cannot be verified as European. 4 4 4

Report an error

Pricing transparency

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: the pricing basis (per employee, per active user, per module), which of reviews, goals, engagement surveys and learning sit in which tier, add-ons for AI or analytics, and the minimum term.

0 — No public prices at all; every module is a sales conversation.

3 — A public "from" price or one tier or module priced, with the rest on request.

5 — Prices public for each tier or module with the pricing basis (per employee or user) and the billing period, and the main modules per tier named.

8 — Every module or tier priced publicly with its basis, add-on prices (AI, analytics, surveys) listed, minimum headcount, minimum term and VAT treatment given.

10 — Complete price computability: the annual invoice derivable for a given headcount and module mix, with every add-on, implementation fee and overage published.

Report an error

The HR IT Integrator

Per-module prices are public with the seat/month basis — Performance $10 seat/month, Goals & OKRs $8 seat/month, Engagement $4 seat/month, Foundations $13 seat/month, Grow at +$4 seat/month and Compensation at +$6 seat/month as add-ons — with Analytics included in all base products. The pricing FAQ raises billing frequency, currency, minimum spend and implementation fees as questions but the captured pages give the questions without the answers, enterprise pricing is a custom quote, and I found no public information on Lattice AI pricing, minimum term or VAT treatment. 2 2 2

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

1 of 4 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

Ownership Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data residency Not determined — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined — uncited Report an error

Questions about Lattice

Is Lattice European?

No. whats-best.ai classifies Lattice as Rest of world. Its vendor, Degree, Inc., is incorporated in United States, per the vendor’s page captured 28 Oct 2026.

Where does Lattice store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 28 Oct 2026.

Does Lattice have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 28 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Lattice?

As of 28 Oct 2026, the panel rates Culture Amp (3.5/5), Small Improvements (3/5) and 15Five (3/5) highest among the other 18 Talent Management products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Small Improvements (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Lattice alternatives.

Where this could be wrong

What we left out

A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.

Do you know more about Lattice? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (10)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor homepage lattice.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 +2 earlier captures: 26 Oct 2026, 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing page lattice.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 +2 earlier captures: 26 Oct 2026, 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Performance reviews lattice.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 +2 earlier captures: 26 Oct 2026, 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Privacy policy lattice.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 +3 earlier captures: 26 Oct 2026, 19 Oct 2026, 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Terms of service lattice.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 +3 earlier captures: 26 Oct 2026, 19 Oct 2026, 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Performance reviews & calibration — found from sitemap lattice.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Performance reviews & calibration — found from sitemap lattice.com Checked 28 Oct 2026 +3 earlier captures: 26 Oct 2026, 26 Oct 2026, 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Goals, OKRs & continuous feedback — found from sitemap lattice.com Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Goals, OKRs & continuous feedback — found from sitemap lattice.com Checked 26 Oct 2026 +5 earlier captures: 19 Oct 2026, 19 Oct 2026, 15 Oct 2026, 13 Oct 2026, 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Learning, skills & succession — found from sitemap lattice.com Checked 26 Oct 2026 Details →