L-005 · Theme 4 · Leadership Discovery
Leadership Self-Assessment Survey
Potential leaders choose relevant experiences instead of being placed blindly.
Developed further: this summary now draws on an initiative-specific internal editorial draft and attributed references. Human review has not started and will open only at the Full-Corpus Review Build.
What could this idea change?
It gives the club a clearer view of people's experiences before decisions are made, including feedback that informal conversations can miss.
It may suit: Current and emerging club leaders, along with the members who work with or support them.
A simple way to start
- Write the decision brief for Leadership Self-Assessment Survey: define how members may explore leadership interest and capability without being informally promised a role, the starting evidence, people affected, local authority, resource limit, success signals and stop conditions. Who could lead it: Board sponsor and leadership-development lead
- Publish the capability and decision need, invite interest fairly, ask about access and workload, declare conflicts and separate development from any formal appointment. Apply this specifically to Leadership Self-Assessment Survey and record which relevant experiences or users are still missing. Who could lead it: Board sponsor and leadership-development lead with the access and privacy contacts
- Build and test a bounded evidence review with defined inputs, participation gaps and interpretation limits for Leadership Self-Assessment Survey; complete the Leadership Self-Assessment Survey Diagnostic Evidence Matrix, rehearse the boundary wording and confirm who may decide, refer, pause, recover or close the work. Who could lead it: Facilitator, mentor or role supervisor
- Use real but bounded practice, observation, reflection and specific feedback; protect confidential information and keep every reserved decision with the authorised office-holder. Capture only the evidence needed to judge whether Leadership Self-Assessment Survey advances fair leadership discovery. Who could lead it: Facilitator, mentor or role supervisor
- Compare the evidence with the starting point, validate meaning with affected participants or users, record gaps and unintended effects and prepare a dated findings summary that separates facts, experience, assumptions and unanswered questions without overstating what the trial proves. Who could lead it: Facilitator, mentor or role supervisor with an independent reviewer
What should we look for?
- After 90 days, review Leadership Self-Assessment Survey. Look for a broader pool of members trying small leadership tasks and receiving useful feedback before larger roles are discussed.
- Leadership Self-Assessment Survey produces a dated findings summary that separates facts, experience, assumptions and unanswered questions by the promised decision date, with evidence limitations, participation gaps and unintended effects stated.
- People affected can explain the purpose, their choices, the boundary and how to raise an access, privacy, safety or governance concern.
- The trial shows whether fair leadership discovery improved from the recorded starting point without shifting hidden workload, risk or exclusion elsewhere.
- Every accepted action has an owner, due date and completion evidence, and the club records a reasoned continue, adapt, refer, scale or stop decision.
Before we say yes
- Does it fit a real local need?
- Can people take part safely and fairly?
- Are the facts, permissions and Rotary branding right?
- Who will lead it, and when will we review it?
