objectivity

Exactly how much confidence should you have in your own leadership abilities? This may seem like an odd question, but try entertaining it for the moment.

Now think of a leader whom you respect. How do you think they would rate their own leadership abilities? 

On a scale of 1-100, where do you think a leader you respect would put her/his leadership abilities?

I find this question fascinating because there is no perfect answer.

If you rate yourself too high, you may seem naïve; how could any great leader believe they have achieved the pinnacle of leadership?

A popular example of this could be the interview with LeBron James from ESPN. As he is retelling the story of him winning the NBA championship with the Cleveland Cavaliers, he pauses in the middle and proclaims himself the greatest basketball player ever. 

But, merely the act of proclaiming yourself as the best at anything beg the question: you certainly are great, but are you really the greatest of all time?  

On the other hand, if somebody rates themselves too low it can cause one to question their competence.

Examples of this are common. It could be any person who doesn’t take the shot because they are afraid to miss and have “wasted” their time.

So with those edge-cases in mind, what do you think is the optimal score?

Fortunately, we at Ambition In Motion have started to study this area in our Executive Horizontal Mentorship program. Here’s what we’ve learned so far.

One measure is a 360-Degree Assessment where we compare self-ratings to how your colleague’s rate your performance across several categories. We asked executives and their colleagues to rate each executive’s leadership abilities and their ability to set proper expectations:

70% of executives rated themselves LOWER at these skills than the ratings from their colleagues. 

On a scale of 1-100, the average executive self-ratings for their own leadership abilities were 59.7/100.

Compared to other components of the 360-Degree Assessment (people management, innovation, communication skills, and financial management), leadership ability had the lowest self-reported score by far, and the most instances of executives rating themselves worse than their colleagues’ perceptions of their leadership abilities.

While I have written another article on my perspective on why these numbers are so low for the executives in our program, for this article, I want to focus on the before and after snapshot of what changed after having an Executive Horizontal Mentor.

After 6 months, the average executive in our program gave themselves a score of 75/100 for their leadership abilities. That’s a 15.3% increase per person over the span of 6 months!

How could this outcome happen? Below are 3 observations from the executives in our program after interviewing them.

I have spoken with hundreds of executives about participating in our Executive Horizontal Mentorship program. The majority of those conversations don’t end up with them signing up for the program. Whether it be that they don’t have the time, or don’t believe in investing money into a relationship like this, or they already have colleagues they go to for guidance, etc. 

But, the type of executive interested in Horizontal Mentorship realizes they have a gap between where they are and where they want to be. If they didn’t have this gap, the reasons listed above would be more than enough to say no. But instead, they choose to say yes because they are at a position in life where they can be vulnerable. They are vulnerable enough to recognize they want help and humble enough to know that their personal status quo simply isn’t cutting it anymore.

Having this executive mentor, if anything else, gives them the confidence to make decisions that they might not have made previously. The executive mentor helps fill that gap and gives them the confidence to know that they are heading in the right direction.

Which leads to the next point…

One of the biggest insights an executive seeks from a Horizontal Mentor is a new, outside perspective. As leaders, we often get used to the routine of being surrounded by a silo of people that we have grown comfortable with.

Leaders in our Executive Horizontal Mentorship program recognized that the only way for them to grow as a leader is by learning to be okay with being uncomfortable. They recognize that their current network gives them consistent feedback and the only way for them to grow is to get out of their comfort zone and build new, deep, intentional mentor relationships.

Before joining the program, their consciousness of this fact played a role in their low self-score. The knowledge they gained, learning how to know what you don’t know, gave them the confidence and insight to know they are moving in a positive direction.

But part of that learning comes with being challenged, which leads to the next point…

Objectivity is the single most important contributor to an executive making big strides in their leadership ability. Having a fellow executive who can share insights and a perspective built from experience will save you immeasurable time and frustration, because they may have gone through similar experiences and can share their wisdom.

Being challenged is part of receiving that objectivity. It isn’t comfortable at first, and it is easy to get defensive immediately. But, after reflection and contemplation, these insights and passed-on knowledge can be the most powerful tools for leaders to improve their abilities. 

Mentors make leaders better by mining the vulnerability and humility they share and turning that into knowledge, confidence, and grit. The process isn’t easy – the more uncomfortable you are the more painful it is – but with pain comes growth. 

Managing a team is complex and empowering, but becomes difficult when factoring in the intricacies of team relationships. When a team member is charging towards a promotion, it can be an exciting and delicate situation for managers. This situation is especially challenging to navigate when a manager has a good relationship with the individual, but they are not prepared to receive a promotion. Determining how to support their ambition while simultaneously managing their expectations for a promotion requires immense consideration.

Creating a structured plan in advance can help managers feel equipped to handle a situation in which they are unable to promote a motivated team member. Workshopping methods of communicating empathy, conveying constructive feedback, setting realistic expectations, creating an actionable plan, and providing continued support will set managers up for success when leading these challenging conversations. With appropriate mechanisms, managers can communicate promotion decisions effectively while also supporting employees' growth. 

Prior to relaying the news that a team member will not receive a promotion, conduct a clear and objective assessment of their performance. Considering the employee’s current performance, skills, and readiness for promotion can focus the assessment and work to eliminate bias due to relationships with the employee. Regardless of personal relationships with the team member pursuing the promotion, it is important to evaluate tangible contributions they make to the team to ensure a comprehensive understanding of their performance. 

This objective assessment will prepare managers for their conversation with the employee seeking a promotion. Being able to recognize specific areas of strengths and weakness will demonstrate to the employee that careful consideration was given to this decision. Use this step to provide concrete examples during the conversation to help the employee understand the decision from an outside perspective. 

After establishing a complete understanding of the employee’s contributions, take steps to determine the logistics of the conversation. Managers may find it beneficial to communicate the news that a promotion was received in an email prior to a one one-on-one conversation as this can help to mentally prepare their employee for the conversation. Other managers prefer to communicate directly with their team member through a face-to-face conversation. Regardless of how the news is broken, a one-on-one conversation is a necessary element of communicating with the employee. 

When planning the message for this conversation, outline key points to be addressed and reference specific examples. Consider how the team member may react to these points and empathetic responses to their emotions to ensure a productive conversation. 

When beginning the conversation, acknowledge their hard work and strong ambition. Make sure to express appreciation for their contributions and the value they provide for the team. Creating a positive environment early on will set a supportive tone for the conversation. Being empathetic allows the employee to feel understood and valued which is vital for keeping this conversation in a constructive direction. With a compassionate approach, the disappointment from not receiving a promotion can be eased and foster open dialogue. 

After establishing a positive tone, provide constructive feedback to communicate why the promotion is not on the table at the moment. It is important to be honest about the assessment of their promotion readiness while also considerate of their feelings. Since they were eager for a promotion, they likely believe the are prepared for the role. Ensuring that they understand areas that need to be focused on before they are ready for the promotion can help them understand the decision. 

While communicating honest feedback, incorporate specific examples of areas that need improvement or further development. Any skills, behaviors or achievements that are necessary to receive the promotion should be addressed. Along with addressing these deficiencies, frame them as growth opportunities. Using growth focused word choice can maintain a forward focused and positive conversation. 

After discussing areas for improvement, set realistic expectations and actionable steps for a promotion timeline. Be transparent about the company’s promotion criteria and associated timelines. Explain why their current timeline may not be achievable and outline specific steps needed to fulfill promotion requirements. 

Work with the employee to create a concrete action plan with steps needed to properly prepare them. Include specific goals, a realistic timeline, resources, and regular progress check ins. Developing a clear path forward gives them a better sense of direction and demonstrates support for their aspirations. 

Consistent with developing an action plan, to support employee’s growth provide ongoing guidance and encouragement. Dedicate time for regular check ins and implement mechanisms for consistent feedback to continue their progress and address challenges. Encourage the employee to reach out with any concerns and questions that arise on their journey towards their goals. 

In addition to maintaining a strong presence through check-ins and feedback, a key component of providing support comes from positive reinforcement. Recognize and celebrate their achievements throughout their journey to increase motivation and engagement. Maintaining support creates a stronger relationship with the employee and actively increases their chances of success. 

Regardless of preparation, managers may receive pushback from their ambitious employees. Given their strong pursuit of a promotion, they may feel disappointed or defensive. Advanced preparation for these reactions and methods to respond with empathy are vital for ensuring a productive conversation. Acknowledge their feelings, and reiterate support for their goals and continued growth. As a manager, maintaining composure and professionalism are also key during these difficult conversations. Avoid being drawn into emotional confrontation and steer the conversation back towards actionable steps. 

Giving constructive feedback to an eager employee seeking a promotion is a delicate task that requires preparation, empathy, and transparency. By objectively considering the situation, communicating empathetically, and developing growth strategies, managers can help guide employees to success while maintaining a strong relationship. While achieving their current goal of being promoted wasn’t attainable, these conversations can empower them to continue to grow in their pursuit of longer-term career aspirations. 

 Sam was sitting in his office reading over a report, but there was a ton of inconsistency. Earlier that month, he and his team were preparing for a major product launch and ready to define the next phase. Every update that came to him was confident, structured, and solution-oriented. He was beyond impressed with the work the teams had completed. It made Sam feel like the strong leader he always aspired to be.

Unfortunately, as results from the product began to roll in, Sam noticed they had underperformed. He was getting frustrated with customers calling, and internal teams were scrambling all over the place. One day, the office was in complete uniform, and before he knew it, everything was a mess.

As Sam started to think about it more, he realized that he unknowingly created a system where information was being filtered before it reached him. Sam’s expectation that leaders come prepared with solutions had subtly reshaped behavior across the organization. Problems were softened before being shared, uncertainty was reframed as confidence, and early warning signs were delayed until they became unavoidable. What he believed was a culture of ownership had, in practice, become a culture of managed perception, and this is precisely where objectivity begins to break down.

Objectivity in leadership is not just about interpreting data correctly. It is about ensuring that truth, especially uncomfortable truth, can travel upward without resistance or distortion. Without that, even the most capable executives risk operating inside a narrowed version of reality.

Organizations don’t crumble overnight. There are small things that slowly start to accumulate, and before you know it, the damage is already done. It's always so hard to detect because on the surface, it looks like everything is working. Meetings are occurring, updates are strong, and everyone is engaged. But beneath the surface, the information being communicated was changing. There was a shift from sharing what is true to sharing what is safe.

Sam’s situation is not unique, but is often difficult to notice. In the eyes of the leader, they believe they are the hallmark of good leadership and foster an environment of accountability. Organizations that lack objectivity create a kind of blind spot because the feedback loop between teams and leadership is broken. Leaders are making decisions on versions that do not even exist. On the other side, people on the inside of the organization who are carrying this do not disengage. They notice that this work is what rewards them and know that they need to conserve themselves accordingly.

In the case of Sam, he told his team that he expected solutions, but he believed he was creating a proactive culture. But what he didn’t notice was how employees had created an image of certainty and confidence, because Sam had created an environment that made doubt feel unsafe.

These filter leaders then continue to encourage an environment that rewards messages over accuracy. The problem was not his intent. It was the gap between the culture he thought he was building and the one that had actually formed around him.

As a leader in this situation, it's important not to overhaul, but just to focus on a few structural behavioral shifts.

Creating a meeting that is devoted to finding those surface gaps, miscommunications, and any questions. Rather than getting polished responses, the team can use this as a place to name what they do not know yet and where the alignment is off. It opens a community that is normalizing uncertainty.

Implementing a practice that has a designated conversation where one person is explicitly tasked with arguing against the prevailing plan. The role rotates, so it does not all fall to the same individual each time. The purpose was not to be contrarian, but to create a protected space for objections that might otherwise never surface.

Instead of finding out the disconnects from a customer call, creating, establishing a standing check-in with each direct report. It would be a ten-minute window to gauge productivity, but also stop miscommunication from the root. It gives leaders access to an early, unpolished version of what is happening. Having an early version of the truth is far better than the cleaned version of it.

Leaders who emphasize only high standards and polished output tend to cast a long shadow over their teams. People begin to optimize for the appearance and performance rather than the reality of it. They think they need to be more perfect, which leads to less accuracy. These are some of the most common leadership failures that quietly drive good people away.

Objectivity, at the end of the day, tethered a leader to reality. To control this, it's important to be intentional to ensure that every source of information is being guided through clearly in a safe and open environment. This is fostered through a safe environment for the teams, leading to long-term success.

The key is separating the standard for outcomes from the standard for communication. You can hold your team to rigorous performance expectations while simultaneously making it safe to share early, uncertain, or incomplete information. In practice, this means rewarding honesty about risk as much as you reward results. When a team member flags a problem early, even without a solution, that deserves the same recognition as a win. Over time, that signal reshapes the culture more than any policy or all-hands message ever could.