HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › Tiny Team · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Tiny Team

3Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

3 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.

Standing

1 label, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Tiny Team was named 1 time in Talent intelligence, where Pin led with 17%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market40 of 77

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In talent intelligence · 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 Tiny Team 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
Talent intelligence	Performance and talent management	0%	40 of 77	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Pin at 17%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative3 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“also look at Tiny Team ($79/month flat after a free tier), though it's more of an all-in-one HR/talent tool” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Talent intelligence · budget 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Tiny Team, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Tiny Team was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Buddy Punch2 of 30Not in the top three

Connecteam2 of 30Not in the top three

LeaveBoard1 of 31Not in the top three

Metaview1 of 31Not in the top three

Pin1 of 31Not in the top three

Vacation Tracker1 of 31Not in the top three

AbsenceSoft1 of 30Not in the top three

BambooHR1 of 30Not in the top three

Beamery1 of 30Not in the top three

Calamari1 of 30Not 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 Tiny Team. 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 3 of the 3 answers that named Tiny Team and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

peoplemanagingpeople.com3

tinyteam.ioYour site3

actiplans.com1

apps365.com1

articsledge.com1

buddypunch.com1

connecteam.com1

eesel.ai1

employsome.com1

firsthr.app1

Eleven of the fourteen domain citations in answers naming Tiny Team came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

actiplans.com/blog/free-leave-management-software1

apps365.com/blog/best-time-and-attendance-software1

articsledge.com/post/leave-management-software1

buddypunch.com/blog/time-and-attendance-software-for-small-businesses1

connecteam.com/leave-management-system1

eesel.ai/blog/metaview-pricing1

employsome.com/best/leave-management-software1

firsthr.app/compare/general/leave-management-system1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 Tiny Team'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 Tiny Team, 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 tinyteam.io 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.