THE DIMENSION
Helping others identify a feasible next step in their own learning.
The dimension in context
Helping others identify a feasible next step in their own learning.
You may connect feedback and opportunity to a person’s development goal.
You may focus on delivery or lack access to development resources.
An illustrative work situation
A colleague is offered a stretch assignment but receives no additional time, guidance, or access to relevant information. The assignment is described as development, yet it may function mainly as extra workload. A useful leadership reflection asks what makes the opportunity possible to learn from.
Development support is not established by assigning harder work. The person needs a workable challenge, appropriate authority, feedback, and room to discuss uncertainty. Their own goals also matter. A leader’s intention can differ from the colleague’s experience, so a concrete conversation is more useful than a broad claim of supporting growth.
A small practice to examine
Choose a learning opportunity with the colleague, clarify the skill involved, and agree the resources and review points. Identify what can safely be unfamiliar and what must already be reliable. Afterward, ask what was learned and what support was missing. Use that account to shape the next opportunity.
Unrequested coaching can become intrusive or paternalistic.
A question for closer study
How can research distinguish a supported learning assignment from an increase in demands labeled as development?
Read the example alongside the research
The following editorial passages come from the linked framework chapters. They provide context for the original teaching example above; the example is fictional and is not a reported study finding.
Researchers could ask participants to respond to a colleague who declines a proposed development activity and suggests an alternative. Reviewers would look for curiosity about the learning need, clarity about any genuine role requirement, and willingness to distinguish support from evaluation. The presence of a performance requirement should be stated honestly rather than concealed in coaching language. A high self-rating on developing others would be difficult to interpret if it corresponded to offering many activities without checking whether they were wanted or useful. Another informative case would be a leader who offers fewer activities but makes each one feasible and proportionate. The proposed domain concerns the quality of the arrangement, not the quantity of development opportunities announced.
Continue: Supporting another person’s development without taking ownership of it →
The MLEAD exercise begins with a question about what the other person wants to learn and what kind of help they would find useful. The participant then agrees one manageable opportunity and a review point. They check afterward whether the support was useful or burdensome. A higher score may reflect attentive support, but frequent unsolicited coaching can feel controlling. A lower score may reflect a relationship in which development is handled elsewhere or the person has not requested help. The report should avoid the assumption that every colleague needs to be coached by the respondent or that a leader can infer developmental needs from a score alone.
Continue: Supporting another person’s development without taking ownership of it →
SOURCES AND FURTHER READING
Judge, Piccolo & Ilies - The forgotten ones? Consideration and initiating structure in leadership research ↗Nembhard & Edmondson - Making it safe: Leader inclusiveness and professional status ↗Yin & Liu - The relationship between empowering leadership and radical creativity ↗