You have likely encountered feedback on your leadership style, or perhaps on your executive presence, even when your project deliverables are on target and your team performs strongly. This type of input can be frustratingly vague. It often suggests a need for adjustment without clearly articulating what specific behaviour requires change, or how the current approach negatively impacts the work itself.
This pattern of feedback frequently arises not from a deficiency in your work, but from an unspoken expectation about how authority should be presented. A colleague might receive praise for assertiveness in driving a decision, while the same behaviour from a woman leader is labelled abrasive or uncollaborative by those who preferred a different outcome or process. This discrepancy arises where informal norms of authority are deeply embedded and operate without explicit, objective criteria for leadership behaviour.
The Disconnect from Performance
The core issue here is a disconnect between the feedback received and the tangible outputs of your role. You might be asked to manage perceptions rather than simply deliver the agreed-upon results. Certainly, effective communication and influence are critical components of leadership, and feedback that clearly links a specific behaviour to a demonstrable negative impact on team cohesion, project timelines, or stakeholder engagement is invaluable. That type of feedback holds true regardless of who delivers it, provided it is tied to an observable outcome.
However, the feedback under discussion often lacks this direct correlation. It focuses instead on subjective interpretations of demeanour or executive gravitas without demonstrating how these attributes directly impede the work itself or its outcomes. It manifests when the way a decision is announced draws more comment than the decision’s strategic merit, diverting attention from impact to form.
Reclaiming the Narrative of Impact
When such feedback arises, press for specificity. Ask how the observed behaviour directly hindered a deliverable, slowed a process, or demonstrably undermined a team objective. Without these concrete connections, the feedback remains subjective and unhelpful. Document the feedback, noting the context, the exact phrasing, and the objective work outcomes at the time. This practice helps distinguish between legitimate developmental areas and subjective preferences based on unexamined expectations.
For organisations, the responsibility lies in scrutinising their performance review processes. If criteria for leadership effectiveness include vague terms like presence or style, these must be rigorously defined with measurable behavioural indicators and linked directly to business outcomes. Leaders and HR departments should challenge feedback that relies on unexamined biases, ensuring that evaluation prioritises impact and results over conformity to unstated, often gendered, expectations of authority. Clear guidelines for what constitutes effective leadership behaviour, tied to organisational objectives, can help mitigate these inconsistencies.
Leadership feedback should always aim to enhance your effectiveness and impact within your role. If feedback implicitly asks you to adapt your approach merely to make others more comfortable with your authority, its value requires careful questioning. Demand that all feedback aligns with demonstrable contributions and outcomes.
