Leadership Standards & Execution Review: What to Expect

The Leadership Standards & Execution Review is a fixed-scope advisory engagement designed to help senior leaders understand where leadership expectations, manager behavior, and execution discipline may be drifting apart.

This review is not a general leadership coaching session. It is a focused assessment of how consistently leadership standards are being translated into day-to-day management practice.

Step One: Executive Intake Discussion

The review begins with an executive intake discussion with Jim Woods of Seattle Consulting Group.

During this session, we clarify the leadership issue that prompted the review, identify the departments or management layers involved, discuss known execution concerns, and determine which standards, policies, leadership messages, or management practices should be examined.

The purpose of the intake discussion is to establish the review focus and understand where leadership intent may not be translating into consistent manager behavior.

Step Two: Leadership Standards Mapping

SCG reviews the standards leadership has communicated or expects managers to apply.

This may include leadership principles, conduct expectations, performance standards, accountability expectations, manager responsibilities, HR policies, internal communications, or operating norms.

The purpose is to identify what leaders believe is clear and compare that with how those standards are likely being applied in practice.

Step Three: Manager Execution Review

SCG examines how leadership standards appear to be translated into manager behavior.

This includes reviewing where managers may be applying expectations differently, delaying accountability, relying on informal practices, escalating inconsistently, or treating similar employee situations differently.

The review focuses on the practical gap between what leadership expects and what employees experience through managers.

Step Four: Consistency and Accountability Assessment

SCG identifies where execution inconsistency may be weakening trust, accountability, performance, or HR credibility.

This includes assessing questions such as:

Are managers working from shared standards?

Are expectations applied consistently across departments?

Are exceptions being approved without clear ownership?

Does HR have enough authority to protect consistency?

Are leaders reinforcing standards when accountability becomes uncomfortable?

Do employees experience the organization differently depending on who manages them?

Step Five: Written Findings Summary

SCG prepares a written findings summary identifying the most important execution gaps, consistency risks, and leadership accountability issues.

The findings are designed to help senior leaders see where expectations are clear in principle but weak in practice.

Step Six: Executive Recommendations Call

The engagement concludes with an executive recommendations call.

During this session, SCG reviews the findings and recommends practical actions to strengthen leadership consistency, manager accountability, and execution discipline.

What the Advisory Fee Includes

The advisory fee includes the executive intake discussion, review of selected leadership standards and related materials, assessment of manager execution patterns, identification of consistency gaps, written findings summary, and executive recommendations call.

What You Receive

At the end of the review, leadership receives a clearer view of where standards are breaking down, where managers may be applying expectations inconsistently, and what must change to make leadership expectations more operationally credible.

Scope Note

Larger leadership alignment engagements, multi-location reviews, implementation support, or extended manager interviews are scoped separately.