How Companies Can Identify Good & Bad Leaders
Welcome to the #culturedrop. Every Tuesday, Galen Emanuele emails tools to advance leadership skills, team culture, and personal growth. No spam, just great content. Sign up now to get it in your inbox.
Good or bad leadership shapes everything for companies.
Great or terrible leadership has an huge impact on the success of organizations. Good leadership lifts performance, engagement, retention, and fosters healthy culture. Bad leadership does exactly the opposite. It erodes morale, drives people out the door, and drags down results.
Every metric organizations care about is influenced by the quality of leadership. How people show up to work, how they treat each other, and how they perform are all tied to leadership. That makes identifying, hiring, and promoting strong leaders, and avoiding bad ones, one of the most important responsibilities of any organization.
Here are some ways that companies can put systems in place to ensure that great leaders are getting hired and promoted.
“Organizations need a well-defined view of what good leadership looks like, and the traits and competencies that they require in leaders.”
1. Start with clear definitions.
The first element is clarity. Organizations need a well-defined view of what good leadership looks like, and the traits and competencies that they require in leaders.
This means going beyond vague ideas like “strong communicator” or “team player.” Be specific. Identify the traits, behaviors, and competencies that matter most. For example:
Open and receptive to feedback
Provides clear, actionable coaching
Communicates effectively across different styles and audiences
Demonstrates empathy and emotional intelligence
Can navigates conflict constructively & effectively
When these expectations are clearly defined, hiring and promotion decisions become more consistent and grounded. Without this clarity, decisions tend to default to personal preference or charisma.
“Charisma can be helpful, but it’s not an indicator of competence. Highly charismatic but ineffective leaders do real damage.”
Charisma can be helpful, but it’s not an indicator of competence. Highly charismatic but ineffective leaders do real damage.
2. Evaluate leaders with real data.
Once expectations are clear, organizations need systems and processes in place to evaluate leaders against them.
One of the most straightforward and effective approaches is to gather direct feedback from team members. The people closest to a leader have the clearest view of how they actually show up, and the impact of their leadership day to day. Structured feedback tied to defined leadership behaviors will provide meaningful insight.
“No great leader has a team that hates them. Specific, consistent feedback from team members is your best data source about leaders.”
No great leader has a team that hates them. Specific, consistent feedback from team members is your best data source about leaders.
3. Use 360 reviews & skip-level conversations.
Feedback should not stop at direct reports. A broader view gives a more accurate picture.
360-degree reviews bring in perspectives from peers and cross-functional partners
Skip-level meetings (a meeting with your bosses boss) allow senior leaders to hear directly from employees about their managers
These mechanisms help surface patterns and sentiment that might otherwise go unnoticed. They also create accountability. Leaders should know that their behavior is visible and measured from multiple angles.
Also, these systems are not just for identifying problems to fire people. They are tools and opportunities for development. When gaps are clear, organizations can invest in coaching and training to help leaders improve.
“When multiple people are involved, hiring decisions are more likely to be grounded in defined criteria rather than personal preference.”
4. Reduce bias in hiring and promotions.
Another common pitfall is how leadership hiring and promotion decisions are made.
Too often, promotions go to the person who has been around the longest or the person who is most liked by decision-makers. These are not reliable indicators of leadership ability. They introduce bias and can reinforce insular decision-making.
Using hiring or promotion committees helps counter this. When multiple people are involved, hiring decisions are more likely to be grounded in defined criteria rather than personal preference. It creates a more objective process and reduces the risk of hiring or elevating the wrong people.
The cost of getting it wrong.
When ineffective leaders gain power, the consequences happen quickly and cause deep, lasting impact. Morale drops, people disengage, culture weakens, solid employees and/or high performers leave. Performance suffers and dysfunction rises.
These effects compound over time. One poor leadership decision can ripple through an entire organization, affecting far more than just a single team.
“Healthy organizations treat the quality of their leaders as a strategic priority, not happenstance.”
Get it right.
Healthy organizations treat the quality of their leaders as a strategic priority, not happenstance. They define what matters, measure it consistently, and make decisions based on data and evidence, not bias.
Clear expectations, thorough feedback, and thoughtful decision-making processes create an environment where good leaders thrive, and poor leaders don’t ruin it for everyone.
The payoff is significant: better performance, stronger culture, and teams that actually want to show up and do great work.
Related Blogs:
Want more?
This article was created by Galen Emanuele for the #culturedrop. Free leadership and team culture content in less than 5 minutes a week. Check out the rest of this month's content and subscribe to the Culture Drop at https://bit.ly/culturedrop
MORE
