HR AI Index
Index Vendors › Pingboard · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Ranked

Pingboard

96Judge labels
8First choices
20Negative labels
12 of 12Models named it
1Category
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.1, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
10% in Org charts for small business buyers
Rank 7 of 81 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
2 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 15% of its 27 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In org charts · 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 Pingboard 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
Org charts and org designWorkforce planning and analytics4%7 of 8115%27accepted challenger

Movement

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

By model

How each model treated Pingboard across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500112
GPT-5.4 mini00011
Gemini 3.5 Flash04004
Perplexity Sonar03104
Grok 4.1 Fast11103
Mistral Small00112
DeepSeek V4 Flash11103
Llama 4 Maverick01102
Qwen 3.7 Flash00101
Kimi K200112
GLM 4.7 FlashX02002
MiniMax M2.501001

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
Direct19 labels4
Paraphrase6 labels1
Comparative29 labelsNone
Budget-constrained11 labels1
Scale-constrained17 labels2
Negative14 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative96 labels in all, every segment counted; 8 of the 8 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.

“Often rated best overall for mid-sized teams... Pingboard or Lucidchart are safe starts for most B2B mid-market needs” Grok 4.1 Fast · Org charts · direct prompt · first choice
“Pingboard (Workleap) offers the best value” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Org charts · direct prompt · first choice
“Pingboard (now part of Workleap) — Best for interactive org charts built around employee connection.” Llama 4 Maverick · Org charts · negative prompt · alternative
“best when you want governed changes, admin workflows, and integrations for a growing mid-market org” Perplexity Sonar · Org charts · 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.

“Requires a custom quote; generally aimed at larger budgets.” Kimi K2 · Org charts · budget prompt · hard negative
“some users find it less intuitive for complex organizational structures and it may not scale well for very large enterprises” Mistral Small · Org charts · negative prompt · soft negative
“a starter plan that's cheaper than Pingboard's ($20 monthly vs $186.25 monthly)” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Org charts · budget prompt · soft negative
“more HR-focused, but can be pricier than the simplest tools” GPT-5.4 mini · Org charts · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Pingboard, over the 96 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Pingboard was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Lucidchart76 of 9612Not in the top three
ChartHop67 of 9617Not in the top three
Organimi59 of 9620Not in the top three
OrgChart45 of 9612Not in the top three
Microsoft Visio41 of 960Not in the top three
Creately35 of 964Not in the top three
Miro32 of 960Not in the top three
SmartDraw25 of 960Not in the top three
OneDirectory20 of 966Not in the top three
Canva18 of 962Not in the top three
A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 Pingboard. 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 78 of the 96 answers that named Pingboard and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

theorgchart.com57
gartner.com51
forbes.com47
orgchartstudio.com45
learn.g2.com41
peoplemanagingpeople.com33
gitnux.org26
peerdom.com26
happeo.com24
onedirectory.com23

373 of the 373 domain citations in answers naming Pingboard came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Pingboard

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Pingboard; a claim can dispute any of them.
Pingboard (Workleap) 3Pingboard (by Workleap) 2Pingboard (now Workleap Pingboard) 1Pingboard (now Workleap) 1Pingboard (now part of Workleap) 1Pingboard / Workleap 1Pingboard by Workleap 1
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 Pingboard'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 Pingboard, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

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 pingboard.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