jollygig vs lattice
lattice is a complete people platform, with a published anonymity threshold and a strong option. jollygig is one focused tool with a floor nobody can lower and no annual minimum.
lattice is a people platform: performance reviews, goals, and engagement surveys in one product, for companies that want one system for how people are managed. if that is what you are shopping for, it is a serious option and worth a proper look.
jollygig is narrower on purpose. we do pulse surveys and the action-planning that follows, plus a separate scheduling tool. of the tools we compare, lattice is the one closest to us in intent: it too says small groups should be protected. this page lays out where each fits. it uses what lattice publishes on its own pricing page and in its help centre, as we read them in october 2026. pages change, so open theirs before you decide.
what lattice does well
- a complete people platform. performance, goals and okrs, and engagement sit in one product, with compensation and growth as add-ons. if you want one system and one login for all of it, that is the pitch, and for plenty of companies it is the right one. we do none of those other things.
- a published anonymity design. lattice's help centre explains how anonymous engagement surveys work: a result stays hidden until a minimum number of people have answered, an administrator can raise that minimum, and the default is five. that is more than most vendors say in public.
- a strong option. lattice also offers a stricter setting that hides the next-smallest group as well, so a small group cannot be worked out by subtracting a larger one from the whole. that is a real problem with any threshold, and it is a thoughtful answer to it. we do not have an equivalent today.
- choice. lattice also lets you run surveys that are identifiable, when you want to know who said what. jollygig never does. if you sometimes need names, that matters.
where jollygig is different
these are deliberate choices, and each has a cost. we try to say what it is.
a floor nobody lowers
in lattice the threshold is a setting: an administrator chooses it, with a minimum of three and a default of five, as the help centre describes it. in jollygig the floor is five, it is fixed, and no administrator, manager or owner can change it. it applies to the team and to every breakdown separately. the cost: a team of four gets no result from us, where a lower setting could show one. we think a floor that cannot be negotiated is worth that. you may weigh it differently.
what is stored, not only what is shown
lattice's help centre describes what managers are shown. we have not seen inside lattice, and we do not claim to know how its answers are stored. what we can say is how ours are: an answer is saved as the team, the check-in and three multiple-choice choices, with no name, no email, no user id and no time of its own, and no free-text box. one limit, said plainly: like every database record, an answer has a creation time in the database's own metadata. we never read it, and the people who run jollygig can technically reach the database, as with any hosted service. the privacy page has the details, and the 5-person rule explains why five.
no annual minimum
lattice lists a minimum annual agreement of $4,000, with contracts billed annually. at $4 a person a month, that is the price of about 84 people for a year. for a company of a few hundred it does not matter. for a single team or a small company it can mean paying for people you do not have. jollygig has no minimum: you can pay monthly, and the trial is 30 days with no card.
per team, not per person
lattice's engagement module is listed at $4 per person per month, billed annually. jollygig charges flat per team: from $20 a month per team billed annually ($25 monthly), growth from $79 ($99 monthly) for up to ten teams. a team of any size pays the same, so nobody has to decide who not to invite. we wrote about that in why per-person pricing breaks pulse surveys. the arithmetic is below, including the sizes where flat stops being the lower number.
the forecast next to the team
jollygig has a second product, scheduling, that turns three-point estimates into a spread of finish dates. link a workspace to a team and the forecast sits beside that team's health, with an optional, undoable what-if that widens the pessimistic estimates when the team shows strain. we did not find a people platform that pairs the two. that is a statement about what we found, not about the market.
narrower scope on purpose
no reviews, no goals, no compensation, no benchmarks against other companies. we keep the survey apart from performance management on purpose, and a platform that puts them side by side is a reasonable choice too. if that is what you want, lattice is the better fit.
side-by-side
| what is compared | lattice | jollygig |
|---|---|---|
| what it is | a people platform: performance, goals, engagement | pulse surveys and action plans, plus a separate scheduling tool |
| survey price, as listed | $4 per person per month, billed annually | flat per team: $20 a month billed annually, $25 monthly |
| minimum contract | $4,000 a year, billed annually | none; monthly or annual |
| how small groups are protected | a threshold before results show, with a strong option for neighbouring groups | no user id on an answer, and a fixed floor of 5 on every result and breakdown |
| can an administrator change the floor | yes: a minimum of 3, a default of 5 | no |
| identifiable surveys | available | never |
| free-text answers, benchmarks | see their site | no free text, no benchmarks, both deliberate |
| integrations, sso, hris sync | see their site | none today: email and a magic link |
| a schedule forecast for the same team | none that we found | yes, a separate product, free for one workspace |
| good fit for | a company that wants one platform for how people are managed | a manager or a small company that wants one focused survey and a floor that stays put |
the arithmetic, per team
list prices only: $4 a person a month from lattice, and jollygig starter, which covers one team of any size. no discounts, no add-ons.
| people on the team | $4 per person, a month | jollygig starter, billed annually | jollygig starter, billed monthly |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | $20 | $20 | $25 |
| 8 | $32 | $20 | $25 |
| 12 | $48 | $20 | $25 |
| 25 | $100 | $20 | $25 |
| 60 | $240 | $20 | $25 |
at five people the two are level on annual billing, and five is the fewest answers we ever show. above that, flat is the lower number, and the gap grows with the team. on monthly billing a team of five pays a little more with us. that is the whole story on price. the table leaves out lattice's $4,000 minimum, which, if it applies to a contract of your size, makes lattice cost more for a small team than the per-person figure suggests. past about 84 people the minimum stops mattering.
when lattice is the right call
- you want performance, goals and engagement in one system, and surveys are one part of a bigger rollout.
- you need a threshold you can tune, a stricter option for neighbouring groups, or surveys that are identifiable some of the time.
- you are a company large enough that an annual contract and per-person pricing fit how you buy.
- you need integrations or sso on day one. check what lattice offers; we have none to offer yet.
when jollygig is the right call
- you want one focused tool, and a floor of five that nobody, including us, can quietly lower.
- you manage a team or a small company and an annual minimum or per-person pricing would make you leave people out.
- you want the delivery forecast for the same team's project next to how the team is doing.
- you would rather start for the price of a month than commit to a year.
switching from lattice
there is no import, and the instruments differ (three fixed multiple-choice questions here), so history would not translate. start fresh and treat the first month as a baseline. if you want to try us beside lattice, the trial is 30 days, with no card. how we work it out names the studies behind what we do and lists what we have not validated, and the pricing page has the full plans.