Leading Managers 360
Leading Managers 360 gathers ratings from a manager's reports, peers, and boss against middle-management competencies, so a coaching conversation starts from evidence instead of self-report alone.
Five boxes run in order, starting with administering the instrument and ending with the development plan built from what the debrief uncovers.
Reach for this when…
- A newly promoted manager's self-view and their team's view of them have clearly diverged.
- A coachee won't accept a blind spot exists until there's data in the room.
- A development plan needs to be anchored in more than one person's opinion.
How to run it
- Administer the instrument to the manager.
- Gather ratings from direct reports, peers, and their own manager.
- Generate the feedback report.
- Debrief the gap between self-rating and others' ratings with a coach.
- Build a development plan around the top two or three priorities.
A worked example
Situation. Ama Boateng had just been made clinic manager at Adom Health Clinic, a private clinic in Accra, Ghana, and described her own style as collaborative.
Applied. The 360 came back with her nursing staff rating her low on delegation and consultation - a gap she hadn't seen coming. The debrief focused entirely on that one competency rather than trying to fix everything the report flagged.
Result. Her development plan committed to one specific behaviour: no schedule decision made without asking the shift lead first. Six months later the same raters scored delegation as her strongest area.
The catch
The report is only as good as the rater pool - a homogenous group of raters produces a homogenous picture, and it captures one point in time. Read too literally, low scores from a team still getting used to a new manager can look like a fixed trait rather than an unfamiliarity effect that will fade.
If the coach doesn't reach the real gap before the coachee gets defensive, the data becomes ammunition instead of insight.