leadership-assessment

name

leadership-assessment

description

USE THIS SKILL when the user asks about succession planning, leadership pipeline, 9-box talent grid, talent review, leadership development, high-potential identification, 360-degree feedback, leadership competency model, bench strength, flight risk assessment, individual development plans, or leadership team effectiveness. Also trigger for "talent calibration," "succession readiness," "leadership capability," "emerging leaders," "executive assessment," "talent mapping," or any request to assess, develop, or plan for leadership capacity across any level of the organization.

Leadership Assessment & Succession Planning

Required Inputs

Input	Description	Required?
Leadership population	Names, roles, levels, tenure, reporting lines	Yes
Performance data	Last 2-3 years of performance ratings and outcomes	Yes
Business strategy	Strategic priorities and future capability needs	Yes
Organizational structure	Current org chart, critical roles identified	Yes
Existing competency model	Current leadership competencies (if any)	Recommended
360 feedback data	Most recent 360 results (if available)	Recommended
Engagement data	Leadership engagement scores, team engagement under each leader	Recommended
Succession plans	Existing succession documentation	Recommended
Attrition data	Historical leadership turnover, exit reasons	Recommended
External market intelligence	Competitor leadership moves, talent availability	Recommended

Execution Steps

1. Leadership Competency Model Framework

Define competencies customized by leadership level:

Core Competencies by Level:

Competency	Emerging Leaders (G3-G4)	Mid-Level Leaders (G5)	Senior Leaders (G6)	Executive (G7 / C-Suite)
Strategic Thinking	Understands team's role in strategy; connects work to goals	Translates strategy into functional plans; anticipates market shifts	Shapes strategy for business unit; makes trade-offs	Sets enterprise direction; navigates ambiguity; long-term vision
Execution Excellence	Delivers results through personal contribution and small team	Drives results across function; manages competing priorities	Delivers P&L or major outcomes; builds systems for scale	Drives enterprise performance; removes systemic barriers
People Leadership	Develops direct reports; gives feedback; builds trust	Builds high-performing teams; manages talent pipeline; coaches managers	Shapes culture; develops leaders of leaders; succession planning	Sets organizational tone; leadership brand; board engagement
Change Leadership	Adapts to change; helps team through transitions	Leads change initiatives; manages resistance; communicates effectively	Sponsors transformation; aligns organization; builds change capability	Drives enterprise transformation; inspires followership at scale
Business Acumen	Understands unit economics and customer impact	Manages budgets; reads financial statements; market awareness	P&L management; competitive strategy; cross-functional impact	Enterprise economics; capital allocation; stakeholder management
Collaboration & Influence	Builds relationships across team boundaries; communicates clearly	Influences without authority; breaks down silos; builds networks	Cross-functional leadership; executive presence; board-ready communication	Industry influence; external stakeholder management; coalition building
Innovation & Learning	Seeks feedback; experiments with improvements; growth mindset	Creates learning culture; encourages experimentation; applies new ideas	Drives innovation agenda; allocates resources to innovation; disrupts legacy thinking	Shapes innovation strategy; builds organizational learning capability

Proficiency Scale:

Rating	Definition	Behavioral Evidence
1 - Developing	Below expectations for level; needs significant development	Struggles with core responsibilities; requires frequent support
2 - Approaching	Partially meets expectations; targeted development needed	Handles routine situations; struggles with complexity
3 - Meeting	Fully meets expectations for current level	Consistently delivers; handles complexity; reliable
4 - Exceeding	Performs above current level; demonstrates next-level behaviors	Takes on stretch assignments; role model for peers
5 - Exceptional	Consistently demonstrates behaviors 1-2 levels above current role	Operates at next level already; teaches and inspires others

2. Performance vs. Potential 9-Box Grid

9-Box Framework:

                          PERFORMANCE
              Low (1)          Medium (2)         High (3)
         +------------------+------------------+------------------+
         |                  |                  |                  |
  High   |  ENIGMA          |  HIGH POTENTIAL   |  STAR            |
  (3)    |  High potential   |  Strong potential |  Top talent      |
         |  but not          |  needs continued  |  Ready for       |
P        |  delivering yet   |  performance      |  significant     |
O        |  Invest &         |  development      |  advancement     |
T        |  redirect         |  Accelerate       |  Stretch & retain|
E        +------------------+------------------+------------------+
N        |                  |                  |                  |
T   Med  |  DILEMMA         |  CORE            |  HIGH PERFORMER  |
I   (2)  |  Moderate         |  CONTRIBUTOR     |  Strong performer|
A        |  potential,       |  Solid, reliable  |  moderate        |
L        |  underperforming  |  backbone of org  |  potential       |
         |  Coach or         |  Develop in role  |  Reward & retain |
         |  redeploy         |  & expand scope   |  selectively     |
         +------------------+------------------+------------------+
         |                  |                  |                  |
  Low    |  UNDERPERFORMER  |  EFFECTIVE        |  WORKHOUSE       |
  (1)    |  Wrong role or   |  Adequate in      |  High performer  |
         |  wrong person    |  current role     |  reached ceiling |
         |  Manage out or   |  Maintain or      |  Recognize &     |
         |  reset           |  right-size role  |  retain in role  |
         +------------------+------------------+------------------+

Calibration Methodology:

Step	Activity	Participants	Duration
1. Pre-work	Managers place direct reports on 9-box with evidence	Individual managers	1-2 weeks before session
2. Calibration session	Cross-calibrate placements with peer managers and skip-level leader	Manager group + facilitator	3-4 hours per session (10-20 leaders reviewed)
3. Calibration rules	Performance = last 2-3 years results (not just current); Potential = demonstrated ability to grow, not tenure	All participants agree to rules	Set at session start
4. Discussion protocol	Present evidence for placement; others challenge; facilitator ensures consistency; consensus required to move anyone	Facilitator-led	Per individual (5-10 min each)
5. Distribution check	Review overall distribution; challenge if >25% are "Stars" or <5% are "Underperformers" (forced distribution NOT required, but distribution should be questioned)	Skip-level leader	End of session

Performance Assessment Criteria (separating performance from potential):

Performance Indicators	Potential Indicators
Achievement of goals and KPIs	Ability: cognitive complexity, learning agility, emotional intelligence
Quality and consistency of results	Aspiration: desire for senior roles, willingness to make sacrifices
Feedback from stakeholders	Engagement: commitment to the organization, not just the role
Reliability and follow-through	Track record of growing into bigger roles successfully
Business impact (quantified)	Self-awareness and coachability

3. Succession Planning Framework

Critical Role Identification:

Criterion	Weight	Score (1-5)	Weighted Score
Revenue / P&L impact if role is vacant	25%
Specialized knowledge or relationships	20%
Time to fill externally	20%
Strategic importance for future direction	20%
Single point of failure (no backup)	15%
Criticality Score	100%		X.X / 5.0

Roles scoring 3.5+ are critical roles requiring active succession planning.

Successor Readiness Assessment:

Critical Role	Incumbent	Ready Now (0-1 yr)	Ready Soon (1-2 yr)	Ready Future (2-3 yr)	Emergency Successor	Bench Strength
[Role]	[Name]	[Name(s)]	[Name(s)]	[Name(s)]	[Name]	Strong / Adequate / Weak / None

Bench Strength Rating:

Rating	Definition	Action Required
Strong	2+ ready-now successors identified; internal pipeline healthy	Monitor, develop for next level
Adequate	1 ready-now, 1-2 ready-soon; acceptable coverage	Accelerate ready-soon development
Weak	Only ready-future candidates; no ready-now	Urgent development + external pipeline
None	No internal successors identified	Immediate external search; emergency plan

Emergency Succession Plan:

Critical Role	Emergency Successor	Interim Capability	Gaps to Address	Support Required
CEO	[Name + rationale]	[What they can/cannot do immediately]	[Key gaps]	[Board support, external advisors]
CFO
[Other critical]

4. Leadership Pipeline Analysis

Bench Strength Dashboard:

Level	Current HC	Projected Vacancies (24mo)	Ready-Now Successors	Ready-Soon (12mo)	Bench Ratio	External Needed
C-Suite (G7)					X:1
VP/SVP (G6)					X:1
Director (G5)					X:1
Manager (G4)					X:1

Target Bench Ratios: C-Suite: 1.5:1 minimum; VP: 2:1; Director: 2.5:1; Manager: 3:1

Pipeline Flow Analysis:

G4 (Manager)     →  G5 (Director)    →  G6 (VP/SVP)      →  G7 (C-Suite)
[X] leaders         [X] leaders          [X] leaders          [X] leaders
[X] HiPos           [X] HiPos            [X] HiPos            [X] HiPos
[X]% promote rate   [X]% promote rate    [X]% promote rate    --
Avg time: [X] yrs   Avg time: [X] yrs    Avg time: [X] yrs   --

5. 360-Degree Feedback Framework

360 Design Parameters:

Element	Specification
Competencies assessed	Aligned to leadership competency model (Step 1)
Rating scale	5-point behavioral frequency (Never / Rarely / Sometimes / Often / Always)
Rater groups	Self, Manager, Direct Reports, Peers, Cross-functional stakeholders
Minimum raters per group	3 per group (except Manager = 1) for confidentiality
Open-ended questions	"What should this leader start doing?" / "Stop doing?" / "Continue doing?"
Report format	Competency scores by rater group, gap analysis (self vs. others), top strengths, development areas

360 Analysis Template:

Competency	Self Rating	Manager	Direct Reports	Peers	Cross-Functional	Gap (Self vs. Others Avg)
Strategic Thinking	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X	+/- X.X
Execution Excellence	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X
People Leadership	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X
Change Leadership	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X
Business Acumen	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X
Collaboration	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X	X.X

Key Insights to Extract:

• Blind spots: Self-rating significantly higher than others (gap > 0.5)
• Hidden strengths: Self-rating significantly lower than others
• Rater group divergence: Large gap between direct reports and manager (indicates different leader in each context)
• Consistent development areas: Low scores across all rater groups

6. Individual Development Plan (IDP) Template

IDP Structure:

Section	Content
Leader Profile	Name, role, level, tenure, 9-box position, career aspiration
Strengths	Top 3 leadership strengths (from 360, performance, calibration)
Development Areas	Top 2-3 development priorities (from 360, calibration, succession gaps)
Career Path	Target next role(s), timeline, readiness gaps

Development Actions (70/20/10 Model):

Development Area	70% On-the-Job	20% Relationships	10% Formal Learning	Timeline	Success Metric
[Area 1]	Stretch assignment: [specific]	Mentor: [Name], Executive coach	[Program / course]	[Dates]	[Observable outcome]
[Area 2]	Cross-functional project: [specific]	Peer learning group, shadow [Leader]	[Workshop]	[Dates]	[Observable outcome]
[Area 3]	Acting role or expanded scope: [specific]	Board exposure, external network	[Certification]	[Dates]	[Observable outcome]

7. High-Potential Identification Criteria

Three-Factor HiPo Assessment:

Factor	Weight	Assessment Method	Score (1-5)	Evidence Required
Ability	40%	Cognitive assessments, learning agility tests, 360 results, track record		Demonstrated growth into increasingly complex roles
Aspiration	30%	Career conversation, willingness to relocate / take risk, stated ambition		Explicit desire for senior roles; willing to make trade-offs
Engagement	30%	Organizational commitment, discretionary effort, retention signals		Committed to this organization, not just the career

HiPo Threshold: Score 3.5+ on ALL three factors. Missing any one factor disqualifies from HiPo designation.

Common HiPo Identification Pitfalls:

Pitfall	Risk	Mitigation
Confusing performance with potential	High performers may be maxed out at current level	Assess learning agility and growth trajectory, not just current results
Recency bias	Most recent performance dominates	Require 2-3 year performance history in calibration
Affinity bias	Leaders nominate people like themselves	Diverse calibration panels; challenge demographics of HiPo pool
Ignoring aspiration	Assuming everyone wants to advance	Career conversations; respect those who want to grow in place
HiPo hoarding	Managers hide talent to keep them	Organizational ownership of talent; cross-functional moves encouraged

8. Leadership Team Effectiveness Assessment

Team Effectiveness Dimensions:

Dimension	Assessment Questions	Rating (1-5)	Evidence
Shared purpose	Does the team have a clear, shared mission?
Trust	Do members demonstrate vulnerability, admit mistakes, ask for help?
Constructive conflict	Does the team debate ideas vigorously without personal attacks?
Commitment	Does the team align on decisions, even when they disagree?
Accountability	Do members hold each other accountable for behaviors and results?
Results focus	Does the team prioritize collective results over individual/functional goals?
Decision quality	Does the team make timely decisions with appropriate rigor?
External orientation	Does the team prioritize customer and market over internal politics?

Scoring: Below 3.0 on any dimension = dysfunction that requires intervention.

9. Flight Risk Assessment

Flight Risk Scoring Model:

Risk Factor	Weight	Indicators	Score (1-5)
Market demand for skills	20%	LinkedIn recruiter contacts, industry hiring trends
Compensation competitiveness	20%	Compa-ratio, recent market movement, below-band
Engagement signals	20%	Engagement survey scores, manager assessment of discretionary effort
Career development	15%	Time in role, promotion velocity vs. peers, expressed frustration
Manager relationship	10%	1:1 quality, trust level, manager effectiveness score
Life events	10%	Relocation, family changes, commute burden (known factors)
Organizational changes	5%	Restructuring, strategy shifts, leadership turnover

Flight Risk Rating:

Score	Rating	Action
1.0 - 2.0	Low risk	Standard engagement and development
2.1 - 3.0	Moderate risk	Proactive retention conversation; address dissatisfiers
3.1 - 4.0	High risk	Urgent retention intervention; executive sponsor engagement
4.1 - 5.0	Critical risk	Immediate action required; retention package if warranted; succession activated

Retention Intervention Toolkit:

Lever	When to Deploy	Cost
Stay interview (career conversation)	Always -- proactive, not reactive	Time only
Retention bonus (one-time, vesting)	Critical talent with competing offer	$$$
Accelerated development (stretch, mentor, program)	HiPo feeling stuck	$$
Compensation adjustment (market correction)	Below-market and likely to get offer	$$
Role redesign (expanded scope, new challenge)	Talent bored in current role	Time
Flexibility (remote, schedule, sabbatical)	Work-life friction	Minimal

10. External Talent Market Mapping

External Pipeline for Critical Gaps:

Critical Role Gap	Internal Successors Available	External Search Required	Target Companies	Target Profiles	Estimated Timeline	Estimated Cost
[Role]	None / Weak bench	Yes -- retained search	[3-5 companies]	[Title, level, industry]	[X] months	$[X]

11. Talent Review Meeting Facilitation Guide

Pre-Meeting Preparation (2-3 weeks before):

Activity	Owner	Deliverable
Distribute 9-box templates with instructions	HR / Talent	Pre-populated templates with performance data
Managers complete 9-box placements with evidence	Line managers	Completed grids with justification narratives
HR compiles aggregate data	HR / Talent	Summary dashboard, demographic analysis of HiPo pool, bench strength overview
Prepare discussion materials for calibration	HR / Talent	Individual profiles for top talent and concerning cases

Meeting Agenda (3-4 hours per session, 10-20 leaders reviewed):

Time	Topic	Facilitation Notes
0:00-0:15	Ground rules and definitions	Review performance vs. potential criteria; confidentiality; calibration rules
0:15-0:30	Aggregate 9-box review	Show full grid; discuss distribution; identify outliers for discussion
0:30-2:30	Individual calibration	5-10 min per person; manager presents, peers challenge, consensus reached
2:30-3:00	Succession review	Review critical roles; validate successor readiness; identify gaps
3:00-3:30	Actions and commitments	Development moves, retention actions, external search needs, follow-up owners
3:30-3:45	Meta-review	Diversity of HiPo pool, systemic gaps, calibration quality

Facilitator Ground Rules:

• Evidence-based: every placement requires specific examples
• Challenge bias: ask "would you say the same if the person were [different demographic]?"
• No anchoring: manager presents, then others share independent assessments
• Separate performance from potential: likeability is not a criterion for either
• Document actions with owners and deadlines

12. Leadership Development Program Design

Program Design by Level:

Element	Emerging Leaders (G3-G4)	Mid-Level Leaders (G5)	Senior Leaders (G6)	Executive (G7)
Duration	6-9 months	9-12 months	12-18 months	Ongoing / cohort-based
Cohort size	20-25	15-20	10-12	6-8
Selection	Manager nomination + HiPo designation	Calibration-identified HiPos	Successor candidates for C-suite	C-suite and board nomination
Core content	Self-awareness, team leadership, execution, communication	Strategy, cross-functional leadership, change management, talent development	Enterprise thinking, board readiness, transformation, culture shaping	CEO perspective, governance, M&A, crisis leadership
Experiential	Cross-functional project, mentor pairing	Business challenge project with C-suite sponsor	External board observation, stretch assignment, acting role	External board service, industry leadership
Assessment	360, personality, learning agility	360, leadership simulation, assessment center	Executive assessment, stakeholder feedback	Board assessment, external coach
ROI metric	Promotion rate within 24 months	Ready-now successor for next level	Bench strength for C-suite	Executive retention and effectiveness

Output Template

# Leadership Assessment & Succession Plan: [Organization]

**Date:** [Date]
**Scope:** [X] leaders assessed across [X] levels
**Assessment Methods:** [9-box calibration, 360 feedback, succession review, etc.]
**Facilitated By:** [Name/Team]

---

## 1. Executive Summary

[2-3 paragraphs: overall leadership health, key strengths, critical gaps, bench strength, recommendations]

**Total Leaders Assessed:** [X]
**High Potentials Identified:** [X] ([X]% of population)
**Critical Roles with No Ready-Now Successor:** [X] of [X]
**Overall Bench Strength:** [Strong / Adequate / Weak]
**High Flight-Risk Leaders:** [X]
**Key Recommendation:** [One-line]

---

## 2. Leadership Competency Assessment

### Competency Model
[Competency framework by level per Step 1]

### Aggregate Competency Scores
| Competency | Avg Score (All Leaders) | Strongest Level | Weakest Level | Development Priority |
|-----------|----------------------|----------------|--------------|---------------------|
| | | | | |

---

## 3. 9-Box Talent Grid

### Aggregate Distribution
| Box | Count | % | Action |
|-----|-------|---|--------|
| Star (High/High) | | | Stretch and retain |
| High Potential | | | Accelerate development |
| High Performer | | | Reward and retain |
| Core Contributor | | | Develop in role |
| Enigma | | | Redirect and coach |
| Underperformer | | | Performance manage |

### Key Talent Profiles
[Individual profiles for Stars, HiPos, and concerning cases]

---

## 4. Succession Plan

### Critical Roles and Bench Strength
| Role | Criticality | Ready Now | Ready Soon | Bench Strength | Action |
|------|-----------|-----------|-----------|---------------|--------|
| | | | | | |

### Emergency Succession
[Emergency succession for top 5-10 critical roles]

---

## 5. Pipeline Analysis

[Bench strength dashboard by level, pipeline flow analysis]

---

## 6. Flight Risk Assessment

[High and critical flight-risk leaders with retention interventions]

---

## 7. Development Priorities

### Organization-Wide Development Themes
[Top 3 competency gaps requiring programmatic investment]

### Individual Development Plans (Top Talent)
[IDPs for Stars and High Potentials]

---

## 8. External Talent Needs

[Roles requiring external search due to pipeline gaps]

---

## 9. Leadership Team Effectiveness

[Team effectiveness assessment for senior leadership team]

---

## 10. Recommended Next Steps

1. [Immediate action with owner and deadline]
2. [Second action]
3. [Third action]

Quality Checks

• Performance and potential are assessed separately with distinct criteria -- never conflated
• 9-box calibration includes evidence requirements and bias mitigation -- not manager opinion alone
• Succession plan identifies ready-now, ready-soon, and ready-future for each critical role -- not just "successor TBD"
• Emergency succession is documented for CEO and all C-suite roles
• Bench strength is quantified with ratios by level and compared to targets
• High-potential identification uses three-factor model (Ability, Aspiration, Engagement) -- not just performance
• 360 feedback analysis includes rater group divergence and blind spot identification
• Flight risk assessment uses multi-factor scoring, not manager gut feel
• Individual development plans follow 70/20/10 model with specific actions, not generic "attend training"
• Leadership competency model differentiates behaviors by level -- same competency, different expectations
• Talent review facilitation guide includes bias mitigation protocols
• Pipeline analysis includes promotion rates, time-in-role, and demographic diversity checks
• Development program design differentiates by leadership level with appropriate content and experiential elements