Beyond the Box: Rethinking Leadership, Performance, and the Dimensions of Success
Current models for evaluating employee performance often rely on a top-down approach, with employees assessed using a "nine-box" framework based on will and skill. Will represents an employee's drive, while skill reflects their mastery of the behaviors necessary to deliver on key performance indicators (KPIs). This heuristic provides a simple, linear tool for evaluation, but it often oversimplifies the complexity of real-world performance. Understanding performance requires a multi-dimensional perspective. Ignoring this complexity is like drawing a flight plan as a straight line on a flat map: while it might seem like the shortest route between two points, it fails to account for the Earth's curvature. True accuracy demands a broader and more nuanced view.
In truth, many factors influencing an employee’s performance extend beyond will and skill. Support, resources, and external influences—elements largely within a leader’s control—play significant roles. Effective leaders proactively provide these supports, seeking to reduce external challenges and create environments where their teams can thrive.
The distinction between management and leadership is critical here. Managers might take credit when things go well and deflect blame when they don’t. Leaders, however, recognize their team’s success is a reflection of their own efforts. If will or skill is lacking, leaders coach to those gaps. But when external factors, insufficient resources, or lack of support hinder even the most skilled and driven employees, that points back to leadership responsibilities.
As we evaluate 2024 and look ahead to 2025, it’s worth reflecting on the broader context of performance. Individual contributors can ask themselves: Did I do my best and push healthily toward results? What obstacles did I encounter in terms of resources or support? Did I communicate those challenges to my leaders? Were there factors entirely outside my influence that affected my goals?
More importantly, leaders should ask similar questions—not only about their teams but also about their own performance. Did you provide the necessary resources and support? If external partners presented challenges, did you take steps to address them constructively? When larger economic or structural issues arose, did you advocate for your team or help mitigate their impact? A fair evaluation of your team’s skill and will must consider whether you, as a leader, did everything possible to empower their success.
This type of reflection isn’t easy, and no leader is perfect. Leadership requires adaptability because no two individuals need the same level or type of guidance. Did you adapt to the unique needs of your team, or did you expect them to conform to your style? In the long run, which approach is likely to yield better outcomes—not just for the team you inherited but also for the team you helped build and nurture?
The nine-box framework may offer a straightforward tool, but it risks oversimplifying a multi-dimensional reality. Just as we need to see the world in three dimensions to fully understand it, we must also recognize the broader context of performance. Leaders must ask themselves: Did I provide the resources and support necessary to amplify my team’s skills and motivation? Did I take steps to remove obstacles beyond their control, including challenges that exist at levels above their “pay grade”?
Finally, consider how you would 9-box yourself as a leader. Did you focus on removing barriers, providing resources, and fostering growth? Did you help address challenges across teams at your level or raise concerns about broader issues affecting your team? Leadership isn’t just about excelling individually in skill and will—it’s about leading through others. How well did you do that?