GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
AI In IndustryTop 10 Best Employee Engagement Technology Services of 2026
Ranked roundup of top employee engagement technology services for enterprise HR, comparing Accenture, Deloitte, PwC, Gallup, and Korn Ferry.
How we ranked these tools
Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.
Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.
AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.
Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.
Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
Gallup is the best fit for enterprises that want consistent engagement measurement with leader-ready reporting and strong segmentation, whereas Great Place to Work is a solid alternative if you need standardized surveys and benchmarking plus structured follow-up across major org segments.
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
Gallup
Gallup’s interpretation layer maps survey responses to engagement drivers and management insights using its proprietary measurement framework.
Built for fits when enterprises need consistent engagement measurement, segmentation, and leader-ready reporting..
Accenture
Editor pickAccenture’s program governance and rollout operations integrate engagement cycles with HR structures and action workflows.
Built for fits when large enterprises need managed engagement program rollout and system integration..
Korn Ferry
Editor pickAction planning workflows tied to organizational reporting for closing the loop at unit level.
Built for fits when HR programs need managed engagement measurement plus governed follow-up across many managers..
Related reading
Comparison Table
Gallup
enterprise_vendorResearch and consulting firm offering employee engagement assessment and advisory services built on the Q12 methodology.
Gallup’s interpretation layer maps survey responses to engagement drivers and management insights using its proprietary measurement framework.
Gallup runs engagement data collection with structured survey templates and reporting views that map results to engagement drivers and organizational insights. The analytics layer centers on interpreting responses through Gallup’s established measurement approach, including cross-group comparisons and leader-ready dashboards. Integration is typically driven by HR and identity connections for survey delivery and reporting visibility, with an emphasis on governance for who gets access to results.
A tradeoff shows up when teams want fully custom instrumentation and a purely flexible data model for nonstandard feedback flows. Gallup works best when organizations run recurring employee pulse surveys and manager effectiveness or lifecycle feedback programs that need consistent measurement over time.
- +Research-backed engagement measurement and interpretation
- +Leader-focused reporting for organization-wide decision cycles
- +Recurring survey program design aligned to consistent scoring
- +Segmentation and comparison views for leadership accountability
- –Less suited to fully bespoke survey instruments and scoring models
- –Integration depth may require IT and HR admin coordination
- –Workflow customization is narrower than survey-tool-first vendors
HR analytics teams
Run quarterly engagement measurement program
Faster executive decision cycles
Chief people officers
Target actions by org segment
Prioritized action planning
Show 2 more scenarios
HRIS and identity admins
Automate survey delivery governance
Lower admin survey overhead
Connect HR systems and identity controls to manage participation and reporting access.
Frontline managers
Review team results and focus areas
Higher follow-through on actions
Access manager-ready reports that translate scores into clear improvement themes.
Best for: Fits when enterprises need consistent engagement measurement, segmentation, and leader-ready reporting.
More related reading
Accenture
enterprise_vendorGlobal professional services firm providing employee experience consulting, engagement technology implementation, and change management.
Accenture’s program governance and rollout operations integrate engagement cycles with HR structures and action workflows.
Accenture’s delivery model fits companies running multi-country employee pulse surveys and manager feedback loops that must align to HRIS structures and organizational hierarchies. The engagement work usually covers survey program design, response-rate analysis practices, and operational cadence for recurring check-ins. Integration depth is a major theme in delivery, with work focused on connecting identity, HR attributes, and downstream reporting consumers so leadership views stay consistent.
A key tradeoff is that outcomes depend on implementation scope and change-management effort, so teams seeking quick self-serve setup often find the delivery timeline slower than product-first vendors. Accenture is a strong usage situation for organizations that already have HR systems and identity providers, but need repeatable governance across teams and an audit-friendly process for how engagement inputs become actions.
- +End-to-end delivery governance for recurring engagement programs
- +Integration work that aligns engagement data with HR attributes
- +Operational support for stakeholder rollout and measurement cadence
- +Automation-focused workflow design for feedback-to-action loops
- –Implementation timelines favor scoped enterprise programs over pilots
- –Self-serve customization varies by engagement delivery plan
- –Requires strong internal ownership for data alignment and rollout
- –Automation depends on integration complexity and stakeholder timing
HR transformation leaders
Pulse survey program rollout at scale
Consistent measurement and reporting cadence
HRIS and data integration teams
Engagement feedback connected to HR attributes
Stable segmentation and leadership views
Show 2 more scenarios
People analytics managers
Action planning from survey outputs
More consistent closure of action items
Designs workflows that convert feedback into follow-up tracking for managers.
Internal comms and engagement owners
Manager effectiveness surveys workflow
Higher adoption of feedback loops
Runs structured survey cycles and reporting to align manager and leadership stakeholders.
Best for: Fits when large enterprises need managed engagement program rollout and system integration.
Korn Ferry
enterprise_vendorOrganizational consulting firm offering employee engagement assessment, leadership development, and culture diagnostic services.
Action planning workflows tied to organizational reporting for closing the loop at unit level.
Korn Ferry fits teams that want engagement instrumentation and action planning handled as a managed program, not only a survey tool. The delivery pattern typically combines engagement templates, interpretation support, and follow-up workflows across manager and HR audiences. Survey configuration and analytics reporting are aimed at converting employee voice into engagement drivers work and heatmap-style prioritization by organization and demographics.
A tradeoff is that the setup and change management effort increases when engagement programs require tightly governed templates and consistent follow-up governance across many managers. Korn Ferry fits situations where multiple touchpoints must be coordinated, such as onboarding feedback plus stay interviews, and where HR needs repeatable reporting structures across business units.
- +Structured follow-up workflows that connect survey results to action planning
- +Organizational reporting that groups insights by unit and demographic segments
- +Experience across multiple feedback points including onboarding and stay interviews
- +Workflow configuration for manager-facing communication and response tracking
- –Higher implementation effort when teams require strict program governance
- –Automation depth depends on integration scope with existing HR systems
- –Advanced analytics usefulness depends on consistent survey template adoption
- –Manager workflow rollout needs change management to avoid low follow-through
HR analytics teams
Quarterly eNPS and driver analysis program
Repeatable insights and prioritized interventions
Talent acquisition leaders
Onboarding feedback and early retention loop
Faster fixes to onboarding friction
Show 2 more scenarios
People managers
Manager effectiveness surveys with follow-up
Higher participation in action steps
Receive unit-level results and route action items through manager-facing workflows.
Compensation and rewards teams
Engagement-linked recognition program feedback
Recognition adjustments based on sentiment
Collect employee pulse survey input and map themes to recognition and rewards workflows.
Best for: Fits when HR programs need managed engagement measurement plus governed follow-up across many managers.
Mercer
enterprise_vendorConsulting firm delivering employee engagement measurement, listening strategy, and HR technology advisory services.
Survey-to-action planning workflow that ties engagement insights to organization-level driver priorities for follow-up cycles.
Mercer differentiates itself through employee listening content and analytics that are tightly aligned to HR and people-analytics workflows. Mercer’s employee engagement offering centers on managed survey programs, driver and sentiment analysis, and structured action-planning support tied to organization and workforce signals.
Mercer also supports integration into existing HR and identity environments so engagement data can be used alongside broader human capital management reporting. For organizations that treat engagement as a governance process, Mercer’s role-based administration and reporting cadence are built around ongoing measurement cycles rather than one-off survey deployments.
- +Action planning outputs are structured around organizational drivers, not just survey results
- +Integration into HR and identity landscapes supports repeatable measurement cycles
- +Benchmarking and segmentation support targeted engagement interventions
- +Managed delivery reduces friction across survey build, rollout, and follow-up
- –Deep configuration and governance requires active HR and program ownership
- –Complex global rollouts can introduce longer setup timelines than lightweight tools
- –Automation depends on Mercer-assisted implementation for advanced workflow patterns
- –Reporting customization can require consultancy for highly specific dashboards
Best for: Fits when global HR teams need managed engagement measurement with strong governance and analytics.
Aon
enterprise_vendorProfessional services firm providing employee engagement survey services and workforce analytics through its HR consulting practice.
Closed-loop action planning tied to assigned owners and governance steps across survey cycles.
Aon delivers employee engagement technology through enterprise HR and talent ecosystem integration, with consulting-led configuration around listening and action workflows. Its core engagement capabilities center on pulse-style feedback collection, structured survey content, and reporting that supports segmentation across organizations and workforce groups.
Aon emphasizes automation for closing the loop, connecting feedback inputs to manager and HR processes instead of only presenting dashboards. Governance is handled via enterprise administration patterns for access control and change tracking across survey deployments.
- +Strong enterprise integration focus across HR and identity ecosystems
- +Action planning workflows tie feedback to owners and follow-up activities
- +Survey deployment supports organizational segmentation for targeted reporting
- +Governance patterns fit multi-stakeholder HR programs
- –More implementation effort than lightweight survey-only vendors
- –Survey template depth can lag specialized engagement point solutions
- –API-based integration breadth depends on project scope and adapters
- –Role-based permissions can feel rigid for highly customized hierarchies
Best for: Fits when large enterprises need governed engagement feedback plus closed-loop action workflows.
Great Place to Work
specialistCertification and research organization providing employee engagement assessment services and workplace culture benchmarking.
Engagement driver reporting that ties survey results to prioritized action planning for managers and teams.
Great Place to Work centers on employee experience measurement and engagement benchmarking using survey workflows, including employee pulse and eNPS-style questions. It combines survey templates with structured reporting that links engagement signals to organizational drivers and workforce segments.
The service also supports ongoing listening by turning survey results into action planning prompts for managers and teams. Great Place to Work is typically chosen when HR and leadership teams need survey governance, standardized question sets, and repeatable engagement reporting across many groups.
- +Standardized survey templates support repeatable pulse and engagement measurement
- +Segmentation reporting helps leadership compare results across key workforce groups
- +Action planning guidance connects findings to manager and team follow-through
- +Benchmark-oriented reporting supports external comparisons of engagement outcomes
- –Survey configuration depth can feel restrictive for highly customized programs
- –Integration coverage may require extra work for organizations with complex HRIS data flows
- –Real-time analytics are limited compared with tools built for continuous text analytics
- –Permissioning and workflow governance need clear internal ownership
Best for: Fits when leadership wants standardized engagement surveys, benchmarking, and structured follow-up across large org segments.
BI Worldwide
specialistEmployee engagement and recognition services firm offering survey programs, incentive design, and event experiences.
Engagement driver reporting that ties results to action planning targets and organizational hierarchy, not just survey dashboards.
BI Worldwide pairs employee engagement survey delivery with HR-focused reporting and employee experience analytics, with an emphasis on managing feedback at scale. The service workflow covers survey program setup, engagement driver reporting, and action planning outputs tied to organizational hierarchy.
Integration capability centers on HRIS and single sign-on connections that support provisioning and consistent respondent access. Automation through reusable templates and API-accessible workflows supports repeatable pulse cycles and manager reporting without manual rework.
- +Action-oriented engagement driver reporting connected to organizational hierarchy
- +HRIS and single sign-on integration supports controlled respondent access
- +Reusable survey templates reduce cycle-to-cycle setup work
- +API-accessible workflows support automation of reporting and survey operations
- –Governance needs are heavier than category tools that stay fully self-serve
- –Advanced text analytics and sentiment outputs depend on configuration
- –Custom automation often requires implementation support and developer time
- –Complex multi-region programs can require additional orchestration work
Best for: Fits when HR teams need managed engagement programs tied to hierarchy and HRIS-backed access controls.
Energage
specialistEmployee engagement survey services firm operating the Top Workplaces recognition program across regional markets.
Action planning built around driver-linked engagement reporting for manager execution and follow-through.
Energage centers employee engagement and continuous listening programs on guided pulse workflows and manager-focused action planning. The service typically combines survey design, engagement analytics, and org-level reporting built around engagement drivers and sentiment patterns.
Energage also supports lifecycle listening use cases like onboarding feedback and stay interviews with configured templates and follow-up cadences. Integration depth depends on the engagement program setup, since HRIS, identity, and data handoff are commonly handled through implementation and connected system configuration.
- +Pulse program design that ties survey results to action planning workflows
- +Engagement analytics that separate drivers and segment insights by org structure
- +Lifecycle listening workflows like onboarding feedback and stay interviews
- +Manager effectiveness reporting that supports targeted interventions
- –Automation and API breadth depend heavily on implementation scope
- –Advanced reporting and segmenting require governance around data definitions
- –Continuous listening cadence changes take time to reconfigure
- –Integrations with existing HRIS and identity can be project-delivery intensive
Best for: Fits when HR and business leaders need managed engagement programs tied to manager actions.
PeopleMetrics
specialistEmployee and patient experience survey services firm providing engagement measurement, action planning, and advisory.
Engagement driver analysis that links survey outcomes to prioritized themes by organizational segments.
PeopleMetrics runs employee engagement pulse surveys and turns results into actionable insights for HR and line leaders. It focuses on continuous listening workflows such as recurring pulse collections, manager effectiveness feedback, and employee lifecycle check-ins.
Reporting is built around engagement drivers with segmentation by organizational groups, which supports targeted interventions. A documented integration and automation surface is designed to connect engagement cycles to HRIS identities and reduce manual survey operations.
- +Engagement driver views support targeted action planning by group
- +Recurring pulse workflows fit continuous listening and lifecycle check-ins
- +Integration and identity mapping reduce survey administration overhead
- +Segmentation supports org hierarchy analysis for focused interventions
- –Complex question sets can require careful configuration to avoid survey fatigue
- –Automation depth depends on how HRIS provisioning is set up
- –Advanced reporting customization takes time to reach steady-state
- –Recognition and rewards workflow coverage is narrower than survey-first competitors
Best for: Fits when HR teams run frequent pulses and need structured segmentation for action planning.
Effectory
specialistEuropean employee feedback and engagement services firm offering survey programs, benchmarking, and organizational consulting.
Survey execution plus structured action planning that connects engagement feedback to assigned follow-up work
Effectory is an employee engagement technology provider focused on survey-based listening and follow-up planning across the employee lifecycle. It supports structured pulse and lifecycle feedback workflows, including engagement drivers and organization-level reporting tied to actionable steps.
Admin users can control templates, roles, and survey publication settings to keep governance consistent across business units. Integration depth shows up most clearly through HR and identity connectors plus an API surface used for automation and data exchange with existing systems.
- +End-to-end survey-to-action workflow for engagement drivers and planning cycles
- +Governance controls for roles, template permissions, and survey publication boundaries
- +Integration options for HR and identity systems plus API-based automation
- +Reporting that supports segmentation for organizational comparison and follow-through
- –Advanced automation typically needs integration work rather than point-and-click setup
- –Customization depth can increase configuration time for complex global hierarchies
- –Action planning workflows may require change management to drive adoption
- –Some engagement analytics depend on how surveys and metadata are modeled upfront
Best for: Fits when HR teams need governed pulse and lifecycle surveys with consistent action planning across regions.
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 ai in industry, Gallup stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
How to Choose the Right employee engagement technology
Employee engagement technology services turn employee pulse surveys and continuous listening into structured engagement insights and governed action cycles across HR and manager workflows. This guide covers Gallup, Accenture, Deloitte, PwC, and the rest of the top ten providers listed in the individual reviews, with special focus on how each vendor closes the loop from survey results to follow-up execution.
Gallup centers interpretation that maps responses to engagement drivers and management insights, while Accenture frames rollout governance that aligns engagement cycles with HR structures and action workflows. Korn Ferry and Mercer both emphasize action planning workflows that connect engagement outputs to organizational reporting and driver priorities, which is often the deciding factor for enterprises that need consistency across many managers.
Employee engagement technology services that deliver survey-to-action workflows
Employee engagement technology services collect employee pulse and lifecycle feedback, run engagement driver reporting, and drive action planning so leaders can translate results into owner-assigned follow-through. Gallup stands out for mapping survey responses to engagement drivers through a proprietary interpretation layer that produces leader-ready insights for organization-wide decision cycles.
Across the top providers, engagement closes through governed follow-up steps that connect survey outputs to templates, publication boundaries, and role-based access patterns used for manager execution. Korn Ferry ties action planning to unit-level organizational reporting, while Effectory pairs survey execution with action planning that connects feedback to assigned follow-up work across regions.
Engagement platforms with survey-to-action governance and measurable interpretation
Employee engagement technology services only move decision cycles forward when survey outputs convert into governed actions that managers and HR can execute and track. Gallup turns responses into engagement drivers and management insights using its proprietary interpretation layer, which is the mechanism that makes leader reporting consistent across cohorts.
The category becomes harder when action planning must stay aligned to organizational structure and identities, not just dashboards. Accenture connects engagement cycles with HR structures and action workflows through rollout governance, while Korn Ferry and Mercer tie follow-up planning to organizational reporting and driver priorities so teams can close the loop at scale.
Interpretation and engagement-driver mapping
Gallup stands out with an interpretation layer that maps survey responses to engagement drivers and management insights for leader-ready reporting. This capability supports consistent engagement-driver views across organization-wide decision cycles.
Survey-to-action workflow and closed-loop ownership
Korn Ferry builds action planning workflows tied to unit-level organizational reporting to close the loop at the manager level. Aon also emphasizes closed-loop action planning that assigns owners and governance steps across survey cycles.
Program rollout governance tied to HR structures
Accenture integrates engagement program governance and rollout operations with HR structures and action workflows for recurring engagement cycles. Effectory pairs survey execution with structured action planning tied to assigned follow-up work across regions.
Hierarchy-aligned reporting and controlled respondent access
BI Worldwide connects engagement driver reporting to organizational hierarchy so action planning targets follow the structure, not just results charts. BI Worldwide also uses HRIS and single sign-on integration to support controlled respondent access.
Action planning rooted in organizational driver priorities
Mercer ties survey-to-action planning outputs to organization-level driver priorities for repeatable follow-up cycles. Energage similarly links driver-linked engagement reporting to manager execution and follow-through.
Choose engagement technology by integration depth, governance control, and closed-loop execution
A buyer selection should start with where engagement data will be converted into actions that managers can complete and HR can govern. Gallup centers interpretation into engagement drivers, while Korn Ferry and Mercer emphasize turning engagement outputs into structured follow-up tied to reporting needs.
Next, buyers should decide how much rollout governance is required and where execution responsibility sits. Accenture is designed for managed enterprise rollout tied to HR structures, while Effectory and Aon emphasize governed roles and publication boundaries around survey execution and action planning.
Match the interpretation approach to how leadership defines “drivers”
Select Gallup when leader reporting needs a consistent engagement-driver mapping that turns responses into management insights using its proprietary interpretation framework. Select Mercer when the program must convert insights into action planning outputs rooted in organization-level driver priorities for follow-up cycles.
Decide whether the core requirement is unit-level closing the loop
Choose Korn Ferry when action planning must connect survey results to unit-level organizational reporting so managers can execute governed follow-up. Choose BI Worldwide when hierarchy-aligned targets must be tied to organizational reporting and HRIS-backed access controls.
Set the governance model based on rollout scope and execution ownership
Choose Accenture when enterprise rollout requires integrated program governance that aligns engagement cycles with HR structures and action workflows. Choose Aon when closed-loop workflows need assigned owners and governance steps across survey cycles.
Validate survey-to-action execution boundaries and role controls
Select Effectory when governance controls must cover roles, template permissions, and survey publication boundaries tied to end-to-end survey-to-action workflows. Choose Great Place to Work when standardized templates must drive repeatable pulse and engagement measurement with segmentation reporting for leadership comparison.
Plan implementation depth around integration scope and configuration appetite
If internal teams want predictable self-serve customization, note that Accenture’s rollout governance can favor scoped enterprise programs over pilots. If teams expect advanced segmentation and analytics, validate how Energage handles automation and API breadth within the chosen implementation scope.
Stress-test for configuration overhead in complex global hierarchies
If global hierarchies require tight governance and templates across regions, validate that Effectory’s customization depth does not add excessive configuration time. If the program must support continuous listening with frequent pulses, confirm that PeopleMetrics can handle complex question sets without creating survey fatigue.
Organizations that need governed engagement execution across managers, regions, and cohorts
Enterprise HR and people analytics teams need engagement technology services when survey outputs must translate into follow-up actions that can be executed, owned, and reported. Gallup fits organizations that prioritize leader-ready reporting built on consistent engagement-driver interpretation.
Large enterprises also need governance structures when engagement cycles must run repeatedly across HR systems, identities, and manager workflows. Accenture, Mercer, Korn Ferry, and Aon fit teams that need closed-loop action planning tied to organizational reporting and HR attributes.
Global HR teams running recurring engagement programs
Mercer and Accenture align follow-up cycles and rollout governance with organization-level driver priorities and HR structures, which supports repeatable measurement and governed action planning.
Enterprises that must close the loop at the manager and unit level
Korn Ferry ties action planning to organizational reporting so managers can execute follow-through for their units, which reduces the gap between survey insights and local action.
Organizations with complex org hierarchies and identity-driven access requirements
BI Worldwide uses HRIS and single sign-on integration to support controlled respondent access and hierarchy-aligned driver reporting for action targets.
Leadership teams that need consistent driver reporting across cohorts and segments
Gallup’s interpretation layer maps responses to engagement drivers and management insights in a way designed for organization-wide decision cycles.
Common ways engagement technology programs stall during rollout and governance
Engagement programs often stall when action planning is treated as a dashboard exercise instead of a governed workflow with assigned ownership and publication boundaries. Aon and Effectory both focus on closed-loop action workflows, so buyers should avoid choosing tools that do not clearly connect feedback to follow-up work.
Buying for survey templates only while ignoring how actions get assigned and tracked
Korn Ferry and Aon both emphasize follow-up workflows that connect engagement feedback to action planning and owner accountability, so the evaluation must include the execution path, not just survey configuration.
Underestimating integration and rollout governance effort for enterprise HR and identity ecosystems
Accenture’s rollout operations integrate engagement cycles with HR structures, and that governance focus can shift timelines away from lightweight pilots, so rollout planning must account for HR and IT coordination.
Allowing customization to drift beyond the scoring and driver framework used for leader reporting
Gallup’s value depends on consistent interpretation that maps responses to engagement drivers, so buyers should avoid goals that require fully bespoke scoring models without validating that framework alignment.
Configuring segmentation and analytics without governance around data definitions
Mercer and BI Worldwide connect reporting to organizational drivers and hierarchy, so buyers should define data definitions early to prevent mismatched demographic segmentation and driver reporting.
How We Selected and Ranked These Providers
We evaluated Gallup, Accenture, and the other top providers using feature depth tied to survey-to-action closed-loop execution, including action planning workflows and governed rollout mechanics. We weighted features at 40% based on how each provider connects engagement outputs to follow-up execution and organization reporting in recurring programs.
We weighted ease and value at 30% each by assessing how directly each provider supports repeatable cycles without forcing excessive governance and configuration work. Gallup ranked highest because its interpretation layer maps survey responses to engagement drivers and management insights for leader-ready reporting across organization-wide decision cycles.
Frequently Asked Questions About employee engagement technology
How do Gallup and Great Place to Work differ in converting survey results into engagement drivers leaders can act on?
Which providers are strongest when engagement programs require governed rollout operations across HR and experience systems?
How should organizations plan SSO and identity access when respondent provisioning must be controlled for every pulse cycle?
When does data migration become a project risk for employee engagement platforms?
What breaks if engagement workflows need API-based integrations for automated survey triggering and downstream action planning?
How do Korn Ferry and Energage handle the “closing the loop” phase across managers and organizational units?
Which provider is best suited for lifecycle feedback loops like onboarding feedback and stay interviews tied to measurement and follow-up?
Where does PeopleMetrics fall short when action planning must map precisely to a complex organizational hierarchy and assigned owners?
How do admin controls differ between Effectory and Aon for template governance and survey publication settings?
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
AI In Industry alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of ai in industry tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare ai in industry tools→