Opening the conversation: why now and who cares

• Tell me the leadership change or timeline that prompted this review, and who requested an independent assessment on your side
• How many promotion or succession decisions are you planning to make in the next 12 months Options: 1-2, 3-5, 6-10, More than 10
• Which roles are on the critical path for your CEO succession, post-merger integration, or restructuring Options: CEO successor, Division leader, Functional head, Integration lead, Other
• Describe a recent promotion or selection that looked good on paper but did not deliver, what facts would have changed that outcome
• Who will be the primary sponsor, who signs off on final recommendations, and who must be briefed privately first Options: CHRO, Head of Talent, CEO, Board Chair, Chief People Officer, Other
• Do you have a target decision window, for example within 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, or longer Options: Within 4 weeks, Within 8 weeks, Within 12 weeks, Within 6 months, No firm deadline

What keeps promoted leaders from landing successfully

• If your chosen internal candidate failed six months after promotion, what would that failure cost your organization in direct and indirect terms Options: Less than $500k, $500k - $2M, $2M - $10M, More than $10M, Hard to estimate
• How confident are you in your current talent review ratings as predictors of future success Options: Very confident, Somewhat confident, Not confident, No idea
• When you run talent calibration meetings, which artifacts do you rely on most Options: Performance ratings, 360 feedback, Structured interviews, Development history, Talent review slides, No consistent artifacts, Other
• Give an example of a finalist that divided opinion in a recent process and what missing evidence would have resolved the debate
• Which single evidence gap, if closed, would make your board comfortable promoting a finalist without hesitation Options: Behavioral data from simulations, Independent psychometrics, Benchmark against similar roles, History of promoted candidate outcomes, Other

Role fit in plain terms: the competencies and behaviors that matter

• Why do your current assessments or interviews fail to persuade the board when the stakes are highest
• Tell me the top leadership competencies you must see for the target role, in ranked order Options: Strategic thinking, Operational delivery, Stakeholder influence, Change leadership, Financial acumen, People leadership, Other
• List the observable behaviors or simulations you want assessed, for example decisive action under ambiguity or leading an integration Options: Decision under ambiguity, Cross functional collaboration, Merger integration leadership, Crisis management, Talent development, Other
• Estimate how many executives will be included in the assessment pool and which levels they occupy Options: 1-3, 4-7, 8-15, 16 or more
• Who should be the comparator cohort that matters most, internal prior promoted cohorts or external role-alike peers Options: Internal prior promoted cohorts, External industry peers, Peer companies in market, Role-alike database norms, Other
• If the assessment showed none of the candidates meet the agreed success criteria, what decision would you be prepared to make within your governance process Options: Delay promotions and invest in development, Open an external search, Appoint an interim leader, Proceed with risk, Other

Where the process breaks down and the pain accumulates

• Where does your current process most often produce false positives and how does that show up in downstream performance or cost
• Describe any regulatory, confidentiality, or HR constraints that have blocked similar assessments in the past
• What timelines or organizational events could derail completion, for example board meetings or filing deadlines Options: Board meetings, Quarter close, M&A milestones, Regulatory filings, CEO transitions, Other
• Name the stakeholder groups most likely to push back and the reasons they typically give Options: Board members, CEO office, Business unit leaders, HR business partners, Employee representatives, Other
• Identify the single logistical or political obstacle that would stop this assessment from happening at all Options: Lack of executive time, Legal or data restrictions, Board resistance, Budget constraints, Confidentiality concerns, Other

The other options you are weighing and what would keep you where you are

• Assuming you could stay with your incumbent approach, what would have to be true about its predictive accuracy and evidence base
• Share which types of external providers or internal models you have shortlisted or rejected and why Options: External assessment firms, Executive search firms, Internal HR-led assessments, Leadership development vendors, In-house capability, Other
• Is anyone on your executive team or procurement group actively recommending solving this without an outside partner Options: Yes, executive sponsor, Yes, procurement, No, Unsure
• Estimate whether maintaining the current approach costs you less or carries more hidden risk than commissioning an external assessment Options: Lower cost and risk than external, About same, Higher cost or hidden risk, Not sure
• Do you have an incumbent assessor under contract or a budget line that would lock you in Options: Active contract in place, Budget allocated but no contract, No budget, Unsure
• Identify who on your buying side would need to be convinced to change course immediately if an external assessment clearly reduced selection risk Options: CHRO, Board Chair, CEO, Head of Talent, Procurement

Can we actually run this here, and what must be in place

• What single missing permission or data source would prevent assessors from accessing the executives you need to evaluate Options: Executive consent, Access to HRIS data, Legal approval, Security clearance, None identified
• List the specific systems where candidate performance or HR data lives, for example your HRIS, learning platform, or performance archive Options: Your primary HRIS, Learning management system, Performance archive, Talent review spreadsheets, Other
• Are APIs or exports available from those systems and which team owns that access Options: Yes, APIs available, Yes, exports available, No automated access, Unsure
• Can your scheduling lead secure uninterrupted one hour blocks with C-suite participants for interviews and simulations Options: Yes for most executives, Yes but limited, No, very difficult, Depends on role
• Provide the total internal headcount hours you expect to commit to prep, administration, and feedback per assessment cohort Options: <20 hours, 20-60 hours, 60-120 hours, >120 hours, Unknown
• Name the legal, compliance, or board approvals required before fieldwork can begin and the typical review lead time Options: Standard HR approvals, Legal review, Data privacy signoff, Board approval required, None identified, Other
• Should you be unable to provide access to key executives within 6 weeks, would you prefer to postpone the assessment, reduce scope, or use proxies Options: Postpone assessment, Reduce scope and proceed, Use proxies and proceed, Cancel

Decision signals, timing, and the smallest pilot that proves value

• Select the single assessment result that would trigger an immediate promotion versus the result that would require development first Options: Clear exceedance of success criteria, Strong readiness with minor gaps, Mixed readiness requiring development, Not ready
• Would your board accept a confidential, plain language readiness profile as the primary decision input Options: Yes, Probably yes with an executive briefing, No, they require additional evidence, Unsure
• Provide the format and cadence of governance meetings where these findings would be discussed Options: Weekly talent committee, Monthly board talent session, Quarterly strategy review, Ad hoc briefings, Other
• In practice, how quickly could you move from receiving final reports to making a decision, for example within 1 week, 3 weeks, or longer Options: Within 1 week, Within 3 weeks, Within 6 weeks, Longer than 6 weeks, Unsure
• Please state the budget range you have ring fenced for external assessment services Options: Under $50k, $50k - $150k, $150k - $300k, Over $300k, Not allocated
• Should the pilot show the predicted lift in placement accuracy, what internal approvals would be needed to scale immediately Options: Board approval, CHRO and CEO sign off, Procurement contract, Budget release, Other
• Please list the stakeholders who want to be present for the final readout and those who must receive a private briefing first

• Assessment Method & Sample Reports Walkthrough

• Run a sample assessment and deliver a plain-language readiness report for one nominated candidate within seven business days.
• Confirm the current state and its cost
• You confirm the demonstrated methodology measures the competencies you named and closes the gaps from your current subjective assessments.
• Walk through the assessment methodology
• You accept the presented normative benchmarking as a relevant comparator for your candidate pool.
• Provide a one-page instrument validity summary and a breakdown of normative cohorts tied to the candidate roles.
• Share role success criteria and a prioritized list of candidates to be assessed.
• You confirm the sample report language is clear and usable for board-level briefing and promotion decisions.
• Review normative benchmarking and validity evidence
• Live walkthrough of a sample plain-language report
• Confirm the decision-maker review date for the sample report to align timing for final delivery.
• You agree the remaining deliverables and timeline needed to reach a decision on assessing your candidate slate.
• Forced validation, confirm this maps to your need
• Agree remaining evidence and next steps

• Assessment Method & Sample Reports Walkthrough
• Assessment Method & Sample Reports Deck
• Assessment Method & Sample Reports — Solution Brief

• meeting
• slides
• document

• Administer psychometric test battery
• Facilitate leadership behavioral simulation
• Conduct structured executive interview
• Score simulations and compile observations
• Benchmark results against executive normative database
• Produce individual readiness profile report
• Deliver one-on-one executive debrief
• Prepare board-level summary briefing
• Draft targeted development action plan
• Provide short-term executive coaching package
• Export assessment data for HRIS consumption
• Validate predictive reliability and outcome summary

Administer psychometric test battery

• Which executives from your CEO succession shortlist must complete the psychometric battery?
• How many distinct testing sessions per executive fit within your succession timeline (single session / two sessions / three or more)? Options: Single session, Two sessions, Three or more
• What role job descriptions and leadership competency frameworks should the battery map to for each assessed role?
• Do any assessed executives require language or accessibility accommodations for the test battery? Options: Yes, No
• Specify which psychometric domains are mandatory for your decision (for example cognitive ability, situational judgment, leadership personality scales). Options: Cognitive ability, Situational judgment, Leadership personality scales, Other
• Provide preferred windows on your HR scheduling calendar for administering tests to senior leaders.

Facilitate leadership behavioral simulation

• Who from your talent management or integration team should be nominated as observers or raters for behavioral simulations?
• Which real-world scenarios tied to your pending merger, restructuring, or CEO transition should the simulations replicate?
• When do simulation outcomes need to be available to feed the talent review and board meeting calendar? Options: Within 1 week, Within 2 weeks, Within 4 weeks, Other
• Do you prefer simulations delivered as remote virtual simulations or in-person assessment center sessions? Options: Remote virtual, In-person assessment center, Hybrid
• Describe any confidentiality or legal constraints on recording role-plays under your board governance policies.
• Indicate expected participant group sizes and session lengths for each simulation when scheduling executive calendars. Options: One-to-one, 60 minutes, One-to-one, 90 minutes, Group-based, 2+ hours, Other

Conduct structured executive interview

• Who should provide reference input or endorsement interviews for each candidate (board member, direct supervisor, peer)? Options: Board member, Direct supervisor, Peer, External stakeholder, Other
• How should interview questions be mapped to the competency thresholds defined in each role profile? Options: Direct competency mapping, Competency plus behavioral indicators, Custom mapping required
• What prior performance artifacts (for example 360 feedback, annual performance evaluations, succession notes) should interviewers review in advance?
• Are there stakeholders whose input must be included by governance rules (for example lead independent director or chair of the nominations committee)? Options: Yes, No
• List any interview recording prohibitions or redaction requirements mandated by your legal counsel.
• Specify interviewer minimum credentials or experience levels you require for credibility with C-suite participants.

Score simulations and compile observations

• Identify who will approve the final scoring rubric that converts behavioral markers to competency ratings.
• Estimate the acceptable inter-rater reliability threshold you require for simulation scores to be considered defensible. Options: ICC >= 0.60, ICC >= 0.70, ICC >= 0.80, Unsure
• What turnaround time do you require for scored simulations to be available for talent review meetings? Options: 48 hours, 5 business days, 10 business days, Other
• Do you allow calibrated norming sessions that include your HR business partner to align raters? Options: Yes, No
• Provide the format you require for compiled observation notes for ingestion into your succession binder or HRIS (narrative, coded competencies, spreadsheet). Options: Narrative, Coded competencies, Spreadsheet export (CSV), Other
• Confirm whether redaction of sensitive anecdotal comments is required before notes are shared with broader stakeholder groups. Options: Yes, No, Only for non-board stakeholders

Benchmark results against executive normative database

• Which comparator cohort best reflects the benchmark you need (industry peers, functional peers, public company C-suite, mid-market executives)? Options: Industry peers, Functional peers, Public company C-suite, Mid-market executives, Other
• How important is industry-specific benchmarking versus cross-industry norms for the board's decision confidence? Options: Critical, Useful but not required, Not important
• What minimum comparator sample size will you accept for a defensible benchmark for a given competency (for example 200+ executives)?
• Are there confidentiality constraints on showing raw comparator-level data to non-board stakeholders? Options: Yes, No, Only aggregated summaries
• Specify demographic or firmographic filters to apply to the normative comparisons (for example region, company size, tenure band).
• Indicate the preferred benchmark outputs you need (percentile ranks, z-scores, narrative interpretation, visual overlays). Options: Percentile ranks, Z-scores, Narrative interpretation, Visual overlays

Produce individual readiness profile report

• What acceptance criteria will confirm an individual readiness profile is complete and acceptable for promotion decisions?
• Which audience levels require tailored report versions (for example board executive summary versus technical appendix for CHRO analytics)? Options: Board executive summary, CHRO technical appendix, Hiring manager one-pager, Other
• How many draft review cycles do you require before report sign-off by the CHRO or committee? Options: Zero (final delivery), One draft, Two drafts, Other
• Do you require anonymized item-level psychometric data included as an appendix for audit or compliance review? Options: Yes, No
• Describe the format for development and promotion recommendations you prefer (for example action steps with owner and timeline, competency gaps with suggested interventions).
• Provide required file formats and any redaction rules for including profiles in your succession binders (for example PDF with redacted identifiers). Options: PDF, Slide deck (PPT), CSV export, Other

Deliver one-on-one executive debrief

• Who should attend the debrief for each assessed executive (for example external coach, HR business partner, direct manager)? Options: External coach, HR business partner, Direct manager, Other
• When should one-on-one debriefs take place relative to assessment completion and the next board meeting? Options: Within 1 week of completion, Within 2 weeks, After board review, Other
• Do you permit recording or verbatim note taking during debriefs for inclusion in development planning? Options: Yes, No, Only with executive consent
• Specify the maximum debrief length acceptable to your senior leaders (for example 45 minutes, 60 minutes). Options: 45 minutes, 60 minutes, 90 minutes, Other
• What outcome elements from the debrief must be captured in your talent records (for example agreed objectives, coach assignment, development budget request)?
• Identify cultural or political dynamics within particular executive relationships that we should avoid when framing feedback.

Prepare board-level summary briefing

• What evidence will validate the board-level briefing meets your governance decision criteria?
• Which readiness metrics from the profiles must be highlighted to the board (for example promotion readiness, succession risk, bench depth)?
• How long is the board briefing slot and what format is required (presentation plus Q&A, one-page decision memo)? Options: Presentation plus Q&A, One-page decision memo, Both
• State any out-of-scope items that must be recorded in the SOW (for example implementation of development plans and ongoing change management).
• Are there audit or compliance artifacts the board requires to accompany the briefing (for example consent records, data access logs)? Options: Yes, No
• Provide preferred deliverable formats for the board binder (for example PDF slide deck, one-page executive summary). Options: PDF slide deck, One-page executive summary, Both

Draft targeted development action plan

• Who in your organization will own implementation of each individual's action plan?
• Which development modalities do you prioritize for senior leaders (for example external executive programs, stretch assignments, 1:1 coaching)? Options: External executive programs, Stretch assignments, 1:1 coaching, Peer learning, Other
• How should success metrics for development be defined against the agreed leadership success criteria (for example role readiness score improvement, promotion within 12 months)?
• Are short-term milestones (for example 30/60/90 day goals) required in each action plan? Options: Yes, No
• Describe your preferred rules for coach assignment (for example internal coach first, then external if no internal match).
• Specify whether progress updates must be pushed into your HRIS or scheduled into succession review cadences. Options: Push to HRIS, Include in succession reviews, Both, Other

Provide short-term executive coaching package

• Which executives are eligible for the included short-term coaching package under this engagement?
• How many coaching hours per executive should the short-term package include to meet your development expectations? Options: 6 hours, 12 hours, 20 hours, Custom
• Do you require a written coaching agreement and confidentiality terms aligned to your legal templates? Options: Yes, No
• Identify minimum coach credentials or accreditations you require for executive-level credibility.
• Are virtual coaching sessions acceptable or do you require in-person sessions for specific senior roles? Options: Virtual, In-person, Hybrid
• Provide required coaching progress reporting elements you want included in talent reviews (for example session notes, goal attainment).

• Master Services Agreement (MSA)
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Fee Schedule & Payment Terms
• Confidentiality Agreement (NDA)
• Data Processing Agreement (DPA)
• Data Access & Authorization Form
• Assessor Credentials & Conflict of Interest Declaration
• Executive Participation Consent
• Report Use & Distribution License
• Fieldwork Authorization & Start Confirmation
• Insurance & Indemnity Schedule

• Fieldwork Readiness and Scheduling
• Individual Executive Assessment Session
• Stakeholder Input Interviews
• Behavioral Simulation Scoring Workshop
• Data Consolidation and Quality Review

• Export the finalized scoring matrix and commentary into the assessment data folder.
• Consolidated stakeholder ratings and evidence for each assessed executive.
• A list of diverging stakeholder views with documented context for later reconciliation.
• Record of stakeholder consent to use their input in the final assessment report.
• Aggregate stakeholder ratings and supporting examples into the stakeholder input file for each executive.
• Identify and document stakeholders not reached or who declined, and propose alternate evidence sources.
• Flag any stakeholder statements requiring follow-up verification during data consolidation.
• Calibration on the scoring rubric and anchors
• Consensus competency scores with supporting behavioral evidence for each simulation.
• List of simulations or items requiring re-run or further clarification.
• Confirm assessed population and session modality
• Document any simulations flagged for re-run and specify the re-run conditions.
• Prepare a short calibration note describing any rubric adjustments made during scoring.
• Reconcile source files and verify completeness
• Validated assessment dataset ready for use in the assessment deliverable.
• Issues log listing unresolved data gaps, recommended remedies, and deadlines.
• Agreement on whether any re-tests or follow-up interviews are required before the deliverable is prepared.
• Assemble and export the validated dataset into the secure reporting folder.
• Publish the issues log with remediation steps and timelines for any outstanding data gaps.
• Schedule any required re-tests or clarification interviews and add them to the project schedule.
• Signed fieldwork schedule with date, time, and modality for each named executive.
• Final instrument and simulation assignment documented for each executive.
• Consent and data access checklist completed for each executive, with gaps listed for follow-up.
• Publish the finalized fieldwork schedule with session modalities and assessor roles.
• Collect outstanding signed consent and data access authorizations before scheduled sessions.
• Upload the master instrument and simulation list to the secure project folder.
• Welcome, consent confirmation, and role profile review
• Completed raw data package for the executive, including interview transcript, test results, simulation recording, and observer notes.
• Any testing anomalies documented with recommended next steps for resolution.
• Timeline and method for clarifications and report delivery confirmed.
• Upload the raw assessment files and observer notes to the secure data folder for that executive.
• Log and describe any testing integrity concerns and recommend re-test or supplemental data collection if required.
• Schedule any required follow-up clarification interview within the agreed timeframe.
• Confirm interview purpose and confidentiality
• Finalize instruments and simulation assignments
• Run psychometric validity and integrity checks
• Structured rating against decision criteria
• Structured behavioral interview
• Score recorded simulations sequentially
• Discuss and resolve scoring discrepancies
• Resolve flagged data discrepancies
• Probe for specific behavioral evidence
• Psychometric test administration and integrity checks
• Consent, confidentiality, and data access checklist
• Clarify divergent views and capture context
• Finalize validated data export and prepare issues log
• Behavioral simulation exercise
• Finalize scoring log and commentary
• Scheduling and logistics
• Define acceptance criteria for completed assessment
• Close and confirm next steps
• Immediate observer debrief and anomaly log
• Session close and next steps

• desired_state
• current_state
• stakeholders
• gaps
• success_criteria
• decision_readiness
• desired_state
• decision_readiness
• current_state
• success_criteria
• gaps
• stakeholders
• desired_state
• success_criteria
• stakeholders
• gaps
• current_state
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness

• Findings Confidence Review
• Roadmap Prioritization and Sequencing
• Implementation Readiness and Blocker Resolution
• Follow-through Progress Review (Quarterly)

• Schedule the next quarterly follow-through review and circulate pre-read status one week prior.
• Status of prioritized initiatives versus roadmap
• Reduce the number of open implementation blockers by documenting action, owner-neutral resolution dates.
• Confirm client-side owner assigned to each initiative and readiness status for each prioritized item.
• Publish a blocker register with resolution actions, owners, and target dates for each open blocker.
• Buyer to secure any internal approvals or resources required to remove the highest-priority blockers within the agreed timelines.
• Update the roadmap to reflect changes to start dates caused by resolved or unresolved blockers.
• Progress summary against the prioritized action list
• Show measurable progress against the prioritized action count with documented evidence for started and completed items.
• Demonstrate a reduction in open implementation blockers and agree remaining resolution steps and dates.
• Publish the quarterly progress dashboard summarizing status of prioritized initiatives and blocker burn-down.
• Buyer to provide evidence artifacts for any completed milestones for inclusion in the shared record.
• Reconfirm scope and acceptance criteria from Assessment Scope
• Document the findings acceptance rate across recommended initiatives, with accepted items enumerated.
• Capture at least a preliminary client-side owner assigned to each accepted initiative.
• Publish a findings acceptance matrix listing accepted, deferred, and contested recommendations for async confirmation.
• Buyer to finalize and confirm client-side owner assignments for each accepted initiative in the published matrix.
• List and assign resolution dates for any documented data gaps or contested findings.
• Recap accepted recommendations and business impact
• Produce a prioritized action list with the agreed prioritized action count and sequencing.
• Confirm a client-side owner assigned to each prioritized initiative and record required inputs to start.
• Publish the prioritized roadmap with provisional start dates and a column for required inputs.
• Buyer to confirm resource availability and update any provisional dates within 5 business days.
• Catalog dependencies between initiatives and flag any that block sequencing for follow-up.
• Present core findings and supporting evidence
• Review and triage implementation blockers
• Blocker burn-down and escalation review
• Rank and sequence initiatives by risk and value
• Define timeline buckets and provisional start dates
• Capture objections, data gaps, and confidence issues
• Early outcome evidence and next milestones
• Confirm owner commitments and handoff readiness
• Confirm owners and required inputs
• Agree immediate remediation steps and timelines
• Agree next checkpoints and documentation handoffs
• Document acceptance decisions and preliminary owner assignments