Using Assessments in Leadership Training Programs

𝗠𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗗𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 I've been asked this at least 3 times in the last two months. "How do I know that my leaders are improving?" This is where we distinguish knowing from application. 10% of capability comes from learning from formal sources. 20% comes from networks and interactions. 70% comes from application to portfolios and projects. One thing that sets this all apart are data points. Even if I apply skills to my projects, how do I know I did it well? Most large companies have a 360-degree or leadership assessment process in place. So, I'll share my thought process for this in case you are attempting to develop this for your own organization. Step 1: Determine organizational strategy and business outcomes. This is necessary to align expectations of desired behaviors. This is where a Balanced Scorecard can come in handy. Step 2: Assess expectations of leaders. You'll then assess them across leadership behaviors for new, mid and even senior managers. Granularity of differences supports focus and clarity. Often, a list of pre-existing behaviors/competencies are used to make the exercise easier. Validated psychometric tools such as the 16PF help to anchor it to scientific rigor. Organizational psychologists like me conduct surveys to gather insights. Then, focus groups are used to drill down to details information. After that, we'll create categories basedon the information and produce working behavior-based definitions. Step 3: Prioritize the list Now, the leadership team decides which behaviors are more important by way of ratings. Step 4: Build the 360 We then build a 360-degree feedback survey questions. These questions are reviewed for validity. Step 5: Allocate the survey A system specializing in the 360 (there are many) can be used. Feedback Recipient selects 6 to 12 people to rate them. In organizations, to avoid selection bias, leaders of the feedback recipient can review and veto the people doing the rating. Then, the participant does the survey too (self-rating) Step 6: Debrief of survey Usually, participants need guidance from a trained coach who understands feedback requirements. This is to provide grounding and objective input. Often, 360 surveys tend to be met with resistance unless the coach is skilled in facilitating the reflection conversation. Step 7: Action Planning The participant then produces a set of actions for improvement. This plan and the priority of focus should be made known to the feedback givers. Step 8: Pulse Surveys After a designated time (within 6 to 12 month period) a validated pulse survey is set up for the observers to rate improvement in specific behaviors. Step 9: Continued Leadership Coaching, Mentoring and Peer Support A combination of these can be used to enhance development. Step 10: Final Comparison Survey Toward the end of the year, a comparison survey is done to see how the key areas have improved or not. ---

Training and coaching programmes in many workplaces are often seen as one-size-fits-all solutions. Its time for that to change, especially when it comes to leadership development. Too often, learning and development initiatives are decided without involving the people who are not actually taking part in them. Organizations make huge investment into programmes, without effective research into people's needs. They don't ask people what they want or need. They presume everyone's needs are the same. There are times where this might be ok....specific technical skills for example or simple standard work practices. But leadership development requires a different approach. To be honest, I used to deliver one-day trainings on leadership skills here and there. But I never felt good about it. I felt like I wasn't adding real value to anyone. I knew most people were likely to forget everything they learned. It seems like such a waste of time and money. Now, I largely provide a blend of training and coaching programmes. They include an assessment of participant needs. They have a measure of individual development over time. Each person's coaching programme is tailored to what they need. I communicate with my programme participant's managers, to support the continuation of coaching long after their initial coaching programme ends. I always think I can do better so I gather feedback from every participant and improve my programmes all the time. These are the best practices guidelines I follow and teach: 1️⃣ Assess participant needs and customize programmes 2️⃣ Clarify the measures of effectiveness that will be used. 3️⃣ Personalize learning paths- this is possible through blending training with 1:1 coaching programmes 4️⃣ Foster a culture of continuous learning where coaching and training is part of what people regularly give and receive. Ensure all managers have effective coaching skills 5️⃣ Evaluate and adjust all training and coaching programmes. Make improvements based on feedback and measures. ❓What else would you add to ensure training and coaching programmes are highly effective? #learninganddevelopment #employeedevelopment #leadershipdevelopment #traininganddevelopment #training #learning #coaching

In the last 10 years I've designed, delivered and assessed the impact of several large scale leadership development programmes. Want to know how I make sure they actually matter and aren't just a pretty certificate or a report of butts on seats? It's my 6 power questions. Start asking these and you're guaranteed to have leadership programmes that create long lasting behaviour change AND reportable outcomes. 1) What are the core leadership capabilities and behaviours we need both now and in the future? This is where you survey leaders at all levels to identify essential skills. If you're not talking to your audience then you're missing a HUGE piece of the puzzle. And for the love of god please incorporate strategy here too. What does the business need to achieve and what role does leadership play? 2) How will you assess current leadership competencies and development needs across the organisation? Are you using 360 reviews, skills assessments, interviews? 3) What development formats will allow for skills practice, real-world application and feedback? This could include workshops, cohorts, mentoring, job rotations, special project assignments... something that let's them practice is essential. 4) How will leadership development intersect with your talent management processes? The amount of times this isn't considered is staggering. Look at integration points with recruitment, promotion, succession planning and performance management. This is crucial. 5) What measures will define the success of this programme at the participant, leadership bench strength, and organisational level? Identify key leading and lagging indicators. Wanna know what these are? 💡 Leading = participation rates, completions of tasks, engagement surveys, tests etc. 💡 Lagging = leadership pipeline for critical roles, if your programmes affect things like EVP and brand, leadership retention, and your key metrics around profitability etc. Great programmes measure both ⬆️ 6) How will you evolve curriculums over time to meet changing business objectives and leadership needs? Build in processes for continuous review and refresh. This is my biggest non-negotiable. At a push you should review every 3 years but I suggest a review every year in line with strategy and business objectives + engagement surveys and employee data. Leadership development is a serious game friends. It's not just away days and leadership theory. This is how you future proof your organisation, and goes from grass roots through to established leadership. Anything I've missed that you would add?👇

Leadership teams often attribute turnover and burnout to external pressures—funding constraints, demanding populations, workforce shortages. But research reveals a different pattern. In our work with helping professions and mission-driven organizations, the most significant predictor of burnout, turnover, and disengagement isn’t workload intensity. It’s leadership behavior. Over 56% of employees currently work for a toxic leader—not because these leaders are inherently bad people, but because they’re operating with outdated models built for control, not complexity. Traditional leadership approaches are reactive, metrics-first, and fundamentally misaligned with the psychological realities of today’s workforce. The result: burnout is normalized, psychological safety is rare, and values exist on paper but not in practice. This is why we developed The Human-Centered Leadership Model™—a neuroscience-informed framework that addresses the structural causes of dysfunction in high-stress organizations. The model is built on five essential pillars: 1. Psychological Safety 2. Resilience & Burnout Prevention 3. Trauma-Informed Leadership 4. Compassionate Accountability 5. Values-Based Decision Making Organizations that adopt this model experience measurable outcomes: improved retention, reduced absenteeism, faster decision-making, and stronger alignment between stated values and actual culture. But transformation begins with assessment. Before organizations can build human-centered leadership systems, they need visibility into where their current leadership practices are breaking down. This is where The Leadership Systems Diagnostic™ becomes essential. The diagnostic uses the Leadership for Psychological Well-Being Scale (LPWS)—a 42-item research-based assessment that measures leadership behaviors across these domains: → Trauma-Informed Awareness→ Burnout & Compassion Fatigue Sensitivity→ Emotional Intelligence→ Human-Centered Leadership Values→ Psychological Safety Promotion→ Empathetic Communication & Relational Trust Organizations receive a diagnostic report identifying leadership patterns, risks, and strengths—along with a clear roadmap for implementing the Human-Centered Leadership Model within their specific context. This isn’t about perfection. It’s about clarity, accountability, and informed leadership decisions. Because sustainable leadership requires more than inspiration. It requires infrastructure designed for equity, psychological safety, and long-term impact. If your organization is experiencing chronic turnover, decision breakdowns, or burnout that persists despite interventions—the issue may not be your people. It may be your leadership system. See the comment section for resources.

You think you're approachable. Your team thinks twice before bringing you bad news. That gap between your intention and their experience is costing you more than you realize. Most leaders have a story about themselves. "I'm approachable." "I empower people." "I don't micromanage." Ask their teams privately, and you often hear a different version. Leaders aren't being dishonest. But they experience themselves through intention, while their team experiences them through impact. 👉 A leader remembers the one time they invited dissent. The team remembers the ten times dissent felt unsafe.  👉 A leader feels calm because they're processing internally. The team experiences silence as disapproval. This gap widens with seniority. The higher you go, the fewer people tell you the unfiltered feedback. Over time, leaders start operating inside a mirror that reflects who they believe they are, not how they're actually experienced. Self-awareness at senior levels isn't a personality trait. It's a system. You can't rely on occasional feedback once your role creates distance from the frontline. You need structured ways to see yourself as others experience you, repeatedly and safely. That's where Assessment & Development Centers help. ⤷ myDayOne uses simulations, role plays, and real scenarios to show leaders how they actually behave under pressure.  ⤷ Feedback comes from multiple trained assessors, reducing bias. ⤷ Insights convert into actionable development plans that track progress over time. Organizations that develop leaders who last don't leave self-awareness to chance. They build structured ways for leaders to see themselves as their teams actually experience them. PS: Do you think most leaders know how their teams actually experience them, or are they operating on assumptions?

"I was in a training last week where we were going through DISC profiles of candidates and reviewing research on how certain combinations result in much better fits for specific leadership roles than others. Not to say other combinations don't work - but there's substantial research showing what the "ideal" profile looks like for certain positions. Here's the analogy that stuck in my head: Can you teach a cat to swim? Absolutely. But both you and the cat will hate it! Same principle applies when you're mapping talent for your leadership team. I see manufacturing leaders make well-intentioned moves - shifting high-performing operations leaders into sales roles, or moving finance executives into supply chain leadership - assuming capability in one area translates directly to another. A detail-oriented high-S operations manager who excels at process stability, forced into a high-D sales leadership role requiring aggressive market expansion? You'll burn them out and get mediocre results. A high-C finance executive who thrives on analysis and controls, pushed into a high-I supply chain role requiring constant supplier relationship management and negotiation? Recipe for disaster. This is why behavioral assessments like DISC or Myers-Briggs should be foundational to your talent mapping strategy - especially when you're planning succession for critical leadership roles. The question isn't "Can we train them?" The question is "Will they thrive, or will both of us end up miserable?" Stop teaching cats to swim. Map your talent to where they'll naturally drive results." #TalentMapping #SuccessionPlanning #LeadershipDevelopment #ManufacturingLeadership #ExecutiveSearch

When Assessments Become Paperwork Instead of Progress Organizations do not get value from assessments themselves. Assessments are just tools.  The biggest missed opportunity I see is what happens after the report shows up. Too often organizations try to save money by handing out the reports without someone to debrief the clients. Real development does not come from scores, computer narratives or reading the separate definitions of the scale down the page, however. Anyone can do that. It comes from leaders sitting with a qualified person helping them to make sense of the data, talking honestly about patterns and, ultimately, choosing different behaviors at work. That is interpretation. That is meaning making. That is where growth actually occurs. If you are investing in assessments, invest even more in the conversations that follow. Work with experts who know how to: - Coach leaders see patterns instead of reading scales - Connect results directly to business choices and relationships - Surface the story under the data and test it in real work Otherwise, you do not have development. You have expensive paperwork. Assessments do not change leaders. Interpretation changes leaders. Choices change organizations. That is the work. #LeadershipDevelopment #ExecutiveCoaching #Assessments #PeopleStrategy #LearningAndDevelopment

💡 "What if the key to your success was hidden in a simple evaluation model?” In the competitive world of corporate training, ensuring the effectiveness of programs is crucial. 📈 But how do you measure success? This is where the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model comes into play, and it became my lifeline during a challenging time. ✨ The Turning Point ✨ Our company invested heavily in a new leadership development program a few years ago. I was tasked with overseeing its success. Despite our best efforts, the initial feedback was mixed, and I felt the pressure mounting. 😟 Then, I discovered the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model. This four-level framework was about to change everything: 🔹Level 1: Reaction - I began by gathering immediate participant feedback. Were they engaged? Did they find the training valuable? This was my first step in understanding the initial impact. 👍 🔹 Level 2: Learning - Next, I measured what participants learned. We used pre-and post-training assessments to gauge their acquired knowledge and skills. 🧠📚 🔹 Level 3: Behavior - The real test came when we looked at behavior changes. Did participants apply their new skills on the job? I conducted follow-up surveys and observed their performance over time. 👀💪 🔹 Level 4: Results - Finally, we analyzed the overall impact on the organization. Were we seeing improved performance and tangible business outcomes? This holistic view provided the evidence we needed. 📊🚀 🌈 The Transformation 🌈 Using the Kirkpatrick Model, we were able to pinpoint strengths and areas for improvement. By iterating on our program based on these insights, we turned things around. Participants were not only learning but applying their new skills effectively, leading to remarkable business results. This journey taught me the power of structured evaluation and the importance of continuous improvement. The Kirkpatrick Model didn't just help us survive; it helped us thrive. 🌟 Ready to transform your training initiatives? Let’s connect with a complimentary 15-minute call with me and discuss how you can leverage the Kirkpatrick Model to drive results. 🚀 https://lnkd.in/grUbB-Kw Share your experiences with training evaluations in the comments below! Let's learn and grow together. 🌱 #CorporateTraining #KirkpatrickModel #ProfessionalDevelopment #TrainingEffectiveness #ContinuousImprovement

As an Organizational Psychologist, I strongly believe in the power of psychometric assessments, both in my workshops and my coaching engagements, to increase self-awareness and create a safe space for self-reflection. A senior leader once shared how, in a heated meeting, they caught themselves reacting defensively. Later, through a psychometric assessment, they discovered their natural conflict style was 'avoidance', which explained both their frustration and the team’s silence. That insight was truly a turning point. By understanding their own patterns, they began to pause, reframe, and engage with curiosity instead of reacting. Self-awareness can be cultivated only through reflection, feedback, and the right assessments, transforming any challenge from a roadblock into an opportunity for trust and growth. #Leadership #SelfAwareness #ConflictResolution #Psychometrics #EmotionalIntelligence

Why does a leader thrive in one company and struggle in another? A bold, risk-taking executive may excel in a fast-growth startup but clash in a highly regulated, process-driven organization. A steady, consensus-building manager might build strong loyalty in a stable culture but move too slowly in a turnaround. Leadership effectiveness depends on fit with culture, strategy, and role demands. Leadership assessments help make that fit visible. Different tools surface different data: - Motivation and work style - Natural strengths and talent patterns - Communication preferences - Career interests - Performance drivers and potential derailers Used well, they help answer practical questions: - Is this leader aligned with where we’re headed? - Where will they have the most impact? - Who is ready for bigger responsibility? - Where are our succession gaps? Below is a snapshot of several commonly used assessment tools and their best uses. The goal is to match the tool to the decision you’re trying to make. The value comes from applying insights to real decisions: role alignment, development planning, succession strategy. If you’re reviewing leadership development this year, this short survey is a useful starting point: https://t2m.io/xDjHrc2