We have developed two simple frameworks—an authenticity index and a self-awareness index… To gauge authenticity, we ask an executive to choose ten from a long list of values that they hold dearest. We then ask 20 to 30 people who work with the executive to select from the same list the top ten values that best describe the leader. Comparing the candidate’s top ten to their assessors’ top ten starkly illustrates whether the leader shows up in the world in the way they intend. Having little to no overlap in the two lists is a red flag, but so are high-contrast misalignments. If the leader cites “accessible” or “approachable” as a key value, for instance, but assessors select “political” or “information-hoarding” instead, boards can factor such disconnects into their decision-making.
The self-awareness test starts without any lists—just open questions. A leader is asked to identify their top strengths and development areas. Then the same questions are posed about that leader in detailed interviews with ten to 15 people who work closely with them. The results provide fodder for two distinct board discussions. First, if the leader’s self-described areas of strength or areas for improvement bear little overlap with those cited by assessors, the board can decide: how much does self-awareness matter in our next CEO? Second, if there is strong correlation between how others view the leader and how the leader views themselves, how do those strengths and development areas align to the needs of the company’s strategy?
Authors: Adam Bryant, David Reimer, Harry Feuerstein
Source: strategy+business
Subjects: Corporate Governance, Leadership, Management
Click to Add the First »