Red Team Program Effectiveness Assessment
Collects structured stakeholder feedback on red-team risk coverage, report quality, and remediation follow-through to identify actionable program improvements across security, engineering, and leadership functions.
Sample questions
A preview of what’s in the template. Every question is editable before you launch.
Which best describes your primary involvement with red-team exercises in the past 12 months?
- Consume findings to make decisions
- Implement technical fixes
- Defensive operations / blue team
- Product or operations stakeholder
- Compliance / governance
- Executive / leadership sponsor
- Other
The following questions ask how well red-team exercises covered key areas in the past 12 months. If you lack direct experience with an area, select the midpoint.
What reporting cadence do you prefer for red-team results and trends?
- After each exercise
- Quarterly rollup
- Biannual
- Annual
- On-demand only
- Not sure
In your experience, how quickly are teams typically able to act on red-team findings after report delivery?
How would you rate the overall maturity of our red-teaming program today?
Based on your responses in this survey, please share any additional thoughts or suggestions about the red-team program that we haven't covered.
Which best describes your primary organizational function?
- Engineering / Development
- Security (including blue team)
- IT / Infrastructure
- Product / Operations
- Compliance / Risk / GRC
- Executive / Leadership
- Other
Thank you for your time. Your input directly informs how we improve red-team coverage, reporting, and overall program impact.
Approximately how many red-team exercises have you directly engaged with in the past 12 months?
- 0 (aware but not directly engaged)
- 1–2
- 3–5
- 6–10
- More than 10
How well did red-team exercises cover application-layer security (web, mobile, APIs)?
Please rank the following elements of a red-team report from most to least valuable to your work.
- Executive summary with business impact
- Attack narrative / timeline
- Evidence and impact detail
- Reproduction steps / proof-of-concept
- Exploitability / likelihood rationale
- Prioritized remediation plan
What most commonly hinders follow-through on red-team findings? (Select up to 3)
- Limited engineering bandwidth
- Disagreement on risk or severity
- Unclear ownership of findings
- Tooling or visibility gaps
- Vendor or third-party dependency
- Competing priorities
- Budget constraints
- Other (please specify)
If you could change one thing about the red-team program for the next cycle, what would it be?
What is your role level?
- Individual contributor
- Manager
- Senior manager
- Director
- VP / C-level
- Other / Prefer not to say
How well did red-team exercises cover infrastructure and cloud environments?
Red-team reports are delivered in a timely manner relative to exercise completion.
Please share one example from the past 12 months where a red-team finding led to a meaningful improvement or fix. If none comes to mind, you may skip this question.
You've shared thoughts on improving the red-team program. Could you elaborate on what specific changes would have the greatest impact on your team's security posture?
How long have you been in your current role at this organization?
- Less than 1 year
- 1–2 years
- 3–5 years
- 6–10 years
- More than 10 years
How well did red-team exercises cover identity and access management (authentication/authorization)?
Red-team reports clearly communicate business impact alongside technical findings.
Where are you primarily located?
- Americas
- EMEA
- APAC
- Prefer not to say
How well did red-team exercises cover third-party and supply-chain risks?
Remediation recommendations in red-team reports are specific and actionable.
How well did red-team exercises cover social engineering and human factors?
Red-team reports contain the right level of technical detail for my needs.
How well did red-team exercises cover physical security?
Findings in red-team reports are prioritized effectively by risk severity.
Overall, how confident are you that red-teaming is currently focused on our highest-risk areas?
Overall, how valuable are red-team findings to your work?
Please rank the following areas by where additional red-team focus would most reduce organizational risk over the next 6 months (top = highest priority).
- Application layer (web, mobile, APIs)
- Infrastructure and cloud
- Identity and access management
- Third parties and supply chain
- Social engineering and human factors
- Physical security
In your view, which specific areas are most under-tested relative to their potential business impact? (Select up to 3)
- Crown-jewel applications
- Secrets management
- Privilege escalation paths
- Data exfiltration routes
- Human factors / social engineering
- Third-party integrations
- Cloud control plane
- Lateral movement
- Other (please specify)
What’s included
AI follow-ups
Adaptive probes on open-ended answers that pull out detail a static form would miss.
Attention checks
Built-in safeguards against rushed answers and low-quality respondents.
AI-drafted copy
Wording, ordering, and branching written by the AI — tuned to your research goal.
Auto report
Themes, quotes, and a plain-English summary write themselves once responses come in.
Ready to launch?
Open this template in the editor. Every part is yours to change before the first respondent sees it.
Related templates
More studies from the same category.
AI Bug Bounty: Scope, Fairness & Incentive Evaluation
An internal stakeholder survey evaluating scope clarity, decision fairness, and incentive effectiveness in your AI bug bounty program over the past 6 months to guide program improvements.
View templateAI Model Card Usability & Developer Trust Survey
Measures how ML/AI practitioners engage with model cards, evaluate documented limitations, and how documentation quality shapes trust and adoption decisions across deployment contexts.
View templateAI Governance & Risk Controls Readiness Assessment
Measures organizational readiness across AI policy clarity, approval workflows, risk tiering, and control maturity. Designed for cross-functional teams involved in AI development, deployment, or oversight.
View templateAI Disclosure & Transparency Expectations Survey
Measures consumer expectations for AI transparency across products and services, capturing preferred disclosure methods, acceptability thresholds, and trust drivers to inform product labeling and policy decisions.
View templateEntertainment Chatbot Engagement & Satisfaction Survey
Measures how often people use an entertainment chatbot (companionship, roleplay, humor, storytelling), what keeps them coming back, and where the experience falls flat — with an AI follow-up that reconstructs a specific memorable conversation to surface what actually made it feel fun, believable, or disappointing. Built for product and content teams shipping character or entertainment-focused AI experiences.
View templateParticipant Comfort with AI Interviewers — Longitudinal Tracking Survey
A repeated-measures survey template designed to track how participant comfort, trust, and naturalness perceptions of AI interviewers evolve across multiple sessions. Administer at each study wave with consistent scaling to enable within-subjects change analysis.
View template