You've chosen the right person for the role. Now, how do you give them the best chance?

Their approach is creating resentment

They're still operating within their old remit

They're capable and committed, but their way of communicating, making decisions or responding to challenge is causing frustration amongst colleagues. People may feel unheard, become reluctant to contribute or start working around them rather than with them.

They're deeply knowledgeable about their own area, but the organisation now needs their judgement on decisions that extend beyond it. Their contribution has to change, not simply their job title.

This doesn't necessarily mean you have the wrong person for the role

But asking someone to delegate more, communicate differently or contribute beyond their own area doesn't tell us what's stopping them, or how to do things differently.

They may understand perfectly well what good leadership looks like and still find themselves responding in familiar ways when they're under pressure.

Before deciding what development someone needs, it's worth understanding what's actually happening, why it's happening and what would need to be different.

The right development starts with understanding the individual

Patterns beneath the feedback

I bring those perspectives together, looking for recurring themes, differences between intention and experience, and strengths that may be working against the leader in certain situations. Relevant assessments can add another dimension where useful.

Specific priorities for development

The findings are translated into a focused set of behavioural priorities: what needs to change, what that would look like in everyday work and how we might recognise progress.

Other people's experience

Confidential interviews with relevant stakeholders, potentially including senior colleagues, peers and direct reports, provide different perspectives on how the leader operates in practice.

Knowing what needs to change is only the beginning

Being told you're too controlling, not strategic enough or difficult to work with doesn't necessarily help you understand why others experience you that way, or what you could do differently.

Even when feedback is accurate, a label can leave someone defending themselves or trying to correct a behaviour without understanding what's behind it.

The work goes further than identifying what needs to improve. We explore the assumptions someone makes, the things they notice or overlook, how they see their role and how their intentions compare with other people's experience of them.

From there, we get specific.

If a leader needs to contribute more effectively at senior level, what does that actually mean? Perhaps they're bringing detailed operational updates to meetings where colleagues need their view on wider business decisions. The development isn't simply to 'be more strategic'. It's to recognise what's needed in those conversations, contribute beyond their own area and be willing to offer a view even when they don't have all the information.

Or perhaps colleagues describe someone as dismissive. Rather than making 'improve relationships' the objective, we look at what they're actually doing. Are they interrupting? Closing down discussion before others have contributed? Dismissing questions they consider unimportant? What would colleagues notice if that began to change?

These become specific priorities that the leader can work on in their day-to-day role. We examine what happens when they try something different, what they learn from the response and what still needs attention.

How do we know whether anything has changed?

We start by establishing what is happening now, drawing on stakeholder interviews, the leader's own observations and examples of where particular behaviours are helping or getting in the way.

For each development priority, we identify what needs to be different, what that would look like in practice, who would notice and what evidence we could reasonably expect to see.

Feedback isn't something we only collect at the beginning and end. I encourage leaders to have more open conversations with the people they work with, including senior colleagues, peers and direct reports. That might mean asking how a particular meeting went, whether they've approached a situation differently or what colleagues are noticing as they take on greater responsibility.

These conversations give the leader immediate feedback they can reflect on and act upon. They also help build relationships in which people feel more able to offer an honest perspective, rather than waiting to be asked through a formal review.

We revisit the original priorities throughout the work, examining what the leader is doing differently and what they're hearing from others.

Where appropriate, I conduct follow-up stakeholder interviews to compare the original feedback with people's more recent experiences. Are they noticing changes? Can they give specific examples? Are those changes holding when the leader is under pressure?

Not every change can be reduced to a number, and different colleagues may experience the same person differently. But we can establish a much more meaningful picture of progress than simply asking whether someone found the development useful.

The aim is for the leader to recognise their own progress, understand where further work is needed and continue seeking feedback and making adjustments long after our work together has finished.

Three ways to work together

01 | LEADERSHIP ASSESSMENT

Understanding what needs to change

02 | SIX-MONTH DEVELOPMENT

The move is happening now

03 | TWELVE-MONTH DEVELOPMENT

Growing into the role

For organisations that want to understand how a particular leader is operating, where their strengths lie and what may need to change as their responsibilities grow.

I bring together the leader's own perspective, confidential stakeholder feedback and relevant assessments to build a clearer picture of their individual development needs.

The outcome is a focused set of priorities and practical recommendations that the organisation and leader can take forward, with or without ongoing coaching.

For organisations supporting a leader who's preparing to step into significantly greater responsibility, or has recently done so.

I begin by understanding what this particular transition requires, drawing on the leader's perspective and relevant stakeholder feedback. From there, the leader and I work on the situations they're facing, the adjustments they need to make and how they're establishing themselves at this level.

Six months of focused development while the transition is happening, with progress reviewed against agreed priorities.

For organisations investing in a leader's development beyond the immediate transition, allowing time for meaningful changes to become established.

I begin by understanding the individual and the demands of their role. Over the following months, we work with real situations as they arise, giving the leader time to test different approaches, gather feedback and develop how they operate at greater seniority.

We revisit the original priorities and examine what's changing in practice, including how others experience their leadership.

Every engagement begins with understanding the individual, the demands of their role and what needs to change.

The leadership assessment can be used on its own or as the starting point for a six or twelve-month development programme. What we learn shapes the work that follows, rather than fitting the leader into a standardised programme.

Working with the organisation. Protecting the individual.

When an organisation invests in a leader's development, it needs to know what the work is intended to achieve and how progress will be recognised.

I involve the leader and their organisational sponsor in agreeing development priorities from the outset. Depending on the engagement, we revisit those priorities together as the work progresses, looking at what's changing and what others are noticing.

But organisational involvement doesn't mean access to private conversations.

A leader needs somewhere they can speak openly, question their own thinking and admit when they don't know how to handle something, without worrying that those conversations will be reported back to their employer.

What is discussed in our one-to-one conversations remains confidential, within the boundaries agreed at the outset. I don't provide separate accounts of those conversations to HR or a line manager unless the leader has asked me to and provided written consent.

The organisation remains involved in the development and its outcomes. The leader retains the independence and privacy needed to do the work properly.

Let's talk about the leader you're investing in.

You may already know where someone needs support, or you may be seeing difficulties without being entirely sure what's behind them or what support would really help.

We can start with a conversation about the individual, the responsibilities they're taking on and what you've noticed so far. I'll explain how I could help and which approach, if any, would be appropriate.