Across this series, I have argued that organizations need to move beyond evaluating leaders only by asking, “Can they deliver results?”
That question matters. Leaders need to produce meaningful outcomes.
But results alone do not tell us whether a leader is capable of building the people, team, culture, and systems required for sustained success.
That is why we also need to evaluate a leader’s Leadership Capability Level.
Leadership Capability Level is the degree to which a leader has developed the internal capacities and leadership capabilities required to lead people, teams, groups, and organizations in ways that bring out the best in others and make results sustainable—not merely how successful, talented, experienced, or technically capable they are.
In the previous two articles, I identified 12 dimensions of Leadership Capability Level. In this article, I will turn those dimensions into a practical self-assessment that leaders, teams, and organizations can use for reflection, coaching, development planning, promotion conversations, and succession planning.
A Simple Leadership Capability Level Self-Assessment
For each statement below, rate yourself on a scale of 1–5:
1 = Rarely true
2 = Occasionally true
3 = Sometimes true
4 = Often true
5 = Consistently true
As you complete the assessment, try to be honest rather than aspirational. Do not rate yourself based on what you value or intend. Rate yourself based on what others would consistently experience from you.
The 12 Evaluation Questions
1. Self-Development
I consistently make time to work on my own growth and development as a leader.
This question matters because leaders who do not develop themselves often become the ceiling for those they lead. If a leader is too busy to grow, they are likely too busy to elevate their leadership.
Elevated leaders understand that you cannot draw from an empty tank. Thus, they always ensure they are regularly (generally daily) adding to their tank.
2. Self-Awareness
I understand my recurring patterns, triggers, blind spots, and the impact my leadership has on others.
This question matters because leaders who do not see themselves clearly cannot lead themselves effectively. They may create fear, confusion, defensiveness, dependency, or frustration without recognizing their role in it.
If you want to go deeper, ask yourself: Do I know the quality of my mindsets? Can I identify the self-protective needs, fears, or assumptions that may be shaping how I lead?
If you don’t have clear answers to these questions, there is room for deepening your self-awareness, and you will elevate if you can get there.
3. Emotional Regulation and Non-Reactivity
I can stay grounded, thoughtful, and constructive when pressure, urgency, or frustration rises.
This question matters because a leader’s emotional state is contagious. Reactive leaders create reactive teams. Grounded leaders create more room for people to think clearly, speak honestly, and act constructively.
Leaders who constantly jump from fire to fire, struggle to pause, or rarely make space for strategic leadership may be lower in this area.
I’ve heard it said this way: The leader’s nervous system sets the nervous system for the team or organization.
4. Purpose, Clarity, and Culture
I create clarity around purpose, priorities, values, and the cultural standards that guide how people work together.
This question matters because ambiguity is expensive. When people are unclear about what matters, why it matters, or how they are expected to work together, energy gets wasted and alignment erodes.
To go deeper, ask: Do we have a clear purpose? Do I talk about that purpose as often as I talk about the outcomes we are trying to drive? Do we have clear values? Do those values actually help people navigate common dilemmas?
5. Empowerment vs. Control
I empower people with ownership, trust, support, and accountability rather than relying on control or micromanagement.
This question matters because control may improve short-term execution, but it often creates long-term dependency. Leaders with higher Leadership Capability Levels build ownership rather than keeping themselves at the center of every decision.
6. Developing Others
I make time to coach, develop, and build the capability of the people I lead.
This question matters because leadership is not merely about getting work done through people. It is about helping people become more capable through the work.
Elevated leaders see their development time and efforts as an investment in the future, not a distraction in the present.
7. Relational Attunement and Psychological Safety
I create an environment where people feel safe to speak honestly, challenge ideas, ask for help, and admit mistakes.
This question matters because teams cannot improve what they cannot discuss. Capable leaders create the trust and safety required for truth, learning, and better decision-making.
Also consider: Has your team stayed the same, improved, or worsened in this area over the last year?
8. Accountability and Standards
I uphold clear standards and address performance issues directly, respectfully, and consistently.
This question matters because accountability is not the opposite of care. It is an expression of care for the person, the team, the mission, and the standard.
Often, when standards are not upheld it is because we have a situation where a person is doing really well in one area (often results delivery), but not so good with another area (often leadership capability). We need to be able to hold the importance of both simultaneously.
9. Conflict Capacity
I address tension, disagreement, and difficult issues directly without avoiding, attacking, appeasing, or creating unnecessary drama.
This question matters because teams do not become healthy by avoiding tension. They become healthy by learning how to work through tension constructively.
Can you create space for surfacing, labeling, and working through emotions? (One might call this vulnerability.)
10. Adaptability and Change Leadership
I can navigate the uncertainty and emotion of change while helping my team do the same.
This question matters because change is not only technical; it is also emotional. Leaders with higher Leadership Capability Levels provide steadiness, clarity, empathy, and forward movement through uncertainty.
Do you have a practice, pattern, or ritual that you can go to when the anxiety of uncertainty or change rises?
11. Strategic Discipline
I am willing to say no, set boundaries, and protect time for the work that matters most.
This question matters because every yes creates a no somewhere else. Leaders who cannot protect priorities often leave their teams busy, reactive, and unfocused.
The ability to set healthy boundaries is a signal of a healthy person.
12. Systems Thinking
I look beyond individual issues and recurring problems to understand the systems, patterns, incentives, and conditions producing the results.
This question matters because organizational outcomes are rarely produced by individuals alone. Leaders with higher Leadership Capability Levels do not just work harder inside the system; they improve the system through which the work gets done.
Most leaders focus on the outcomes. The most elevated leaders focus on the drivers of those outcomes. And, they seek to get as close to the root as possible.
How to Score the Assessment
Add up your total score across the 12 questions.
Your total will fall somewhere between 12 and 60.
And note: Poor and damaging leaders are not poor across the board. When I assess leaders, I generally find that poor leaders struggle with a handful of these 12 areas, while simultaneously doing quite well in the others.
Below 41: Low Leadership Capability Level
This suggests that the leader may be underdeveloped in several of the internal capacities and leadership capabilities required to lead people, teams, groups, and organizations in ways that bring out the best in others and make results sustainable.
If a leader in this range is producing strong results, those results may be highly dependent on their personal effort, control, expertise, urgency, or intensity. They may be able to drive outcomes in the short term, but they may not be building the people, culture, and systems required for long-term success.
The development opportunity is to identify the few dimensions that most limit the leader’s ability to build trust, clarity, ownership, capability, and sustainable performance.
42–51: Moderate Leadership Capability Level
This suggests that the leader has developed some important leadership capacities and capabilities but likely has unevenness across dimensions.
They may be effective in some situations but become more reactive, controlling, avoidant, unclear, or overwhelmed under pressure. They may lead well with certain people or in certain contexts, but struggle when stakes rise, conflict emerges, change accelerates, or the system becomes more complex.
The development opportunity is to identify the leader’s strongest dimensions and their most important growth edges. Moderate Leadership Capability Level is not a fixed category. It is an invitation to become more consistent, more intentional, and more capable across a wider range of leadership situations.
52–60: High Leadership Capability Level
This suggests that the leader is more consistently operating from the internal capacities and leadership capabilities required to build trust, create clarity, develop others, navigate tension and change, empower ownership, think systemically, and produce sustainable value through others.
These leaders are more likely to create team/system-enabled performance rather than leader-dependent performance.
But a high score should not become a reason for complacency. The most capable leaders are often the ones most aware that development is ongoing. They keep learning, seeking feedback, and expanding their capacity because they understand that leadership complexity continues to grow.
What This Assessment Does—and Does Not—Measure
This assessment does not measure whether a leader is delivering results.
It measures the degree to which a leader has developed the internal capacities and leadership capabilities required to lead in ways that make results more sustainable.
That distinction is important.
A leader may score high on Leadership Capability Level but still need to improve execution, strategic influence, business acumen, decision-making speed, or role-specific performance.
A leader may score low on Leadership Capability Level but still produce impressive short-term results.
That is why this assessment should not replace performance evaluation. It should complete it.
Organizations need to ask both:
Can this leader deliver results?
And:
Is this leader truly capable of leading others in ways that bring out their best and make results sustainable?
The first question tells us whether the leader can perform.
The second tells us whether the leader can build capacity.
How to Use the Results
If you are using this assessment for yourself, look for your lowest-scoring dimensions. Do not try to improve all 12 at once. Identify one or two dimensions that, if improved, would have the greatest positive effect on your leadership.
If you are using this assessment with a team, discuss the dimensions collectively. Where are we strongest? Where are we weakest? Which dimension is most limiting our ability to build trust, clarity, ownership, capability, and sustainable performance?
If you are using this assessment to evaluate other leaders, be careful not to rely only on self-perception. The most accurate picture will come from multiple sources: self-reflection, manager observation, peer feedback, direct-report feedback, and behavioral evidence.
The goal is not to label people.
The goal is to develop them.
The Leadership Evaluation Shift
The real test of leadership is not whether people perform when the leader is driving everything.
The real test is whether people, teams, and systems become more capable because of how the leader leads.
That is the shift organizations need to make.
Do not just evaluate what leaders produce.
Evaluate what they are capable of developing in others and in the system.
Because the most valuable leaders are not merely the ones who deliver results today. They are the ones who build the capacity for better results tomorrow.
What’s Coming Next in This Series
This article is the fifth in a six-part series on Leadership Capability Level.
Article 6: How to Elevate Leadership Capability Level
We will explore how leaders can actually elevate their Leadership Capability Level by moving beyond Doing Side development—skills, tools, and techniques—and focusing on Being Side development: the deeper work of upgrading the internal operating system from which they lead.
Ready to Evaluate What Your Leaders Are Truly Capable of Building?
Don’t just evaluate what your leaders produce. Evaluate what they are capable of developing in others and in the system.
If you want help assessing and elevating your leaders’ Leadership Capability Level, let’s connect.
