Where we are
Coaching is the weekly mechanism. A growth plan is the quarterly direction it points in - without one, coaching becomes a series of well-run conversations about whatever happened that week, which is useful for delivery and does not accumulate into a capability. Two design rules carry the session. First, one goal. A plan with five goals is a plan with none, because there is no way to sequence attention and nothing gets the repeated practice that actually builds skill. Second, growth happens on real work. Courses and reading create awareness; doing the thing, badly at first, with someone reviewing it, creates capability. If your growth plan is a list of training to attend, it will not change anything and everybody involved already suspects that.
A skills matrix is also a risk map 6 min live
Before writing anyone's growth plan, look at the team as a whole. The same grid tells you what each person should learn next and where you are one resignation away from a problem.
LiveFour levels, and why "can teach it" is the top one3 min▶
Keep the scale to four: none, learning, can do it, can teach it. Two reasons the top level is teaching rather than expertise:
- It is observable. "Expert" is a self-assessment; "has taught this to someone who can now do it" is a fact with a witness.
- It builds bench depth as a side effect. If your top level requires teaching, then developing your strongest people automatically reduces the single-point-of-failure risk in the columns.
Fill it in with the team rather than about them. Self-assessment plus your view produces both a more accurate grid and a conversation about the gaps, which is where the growth goals come from. Expect one surprise per person - usually someone rating themselves lower than you would on something they have quietly mastered.
The column that resigned. The pricing-model column above is not hypothetical - it is the situation from the leader track's key-person discussion, seen from the manager's chair. When Ade left, the model became unmaintainable for two quarters, and the growth plan that would have prevented it (Tomas learning it properly, with Ade teaching) had been discussed for a year and never scheduled, because there was always something more urgent. A skills matrix makes that cost visible before rather than after.
One goal, five parts, attached to real work 6 min live
A growth goal survives a busy quarter only if it is riding on work that was going to happen anyway. Anything that needs extra time carved out of a full week loses to delivery every time, and then reappears in the next review as a failure of the person's commitment.
LiveDesigning a stretch that is not a trap3 min▶
Stretch assignments are how capability grows fastest and also how people get quietly damaged. The difference is entirely in the design, and it comes down to whether failing is survivable:
- Safe-to-fail. If it goes badly, what is the actual damage? A stretch where failure loses a major client or a quarter's revenue is not a development opportunity, it is a gamble with someone's reputation.
- A named safety net. Who notices if it is going wrong, and when? Somebody other than the person doing it should be watching, with an agreed point to intervene.
- Visible support, not visible rescue. Being publicly rescued is worse than struggling. Agree in advance how help arrives and who sees it.
- Explicit framing. Say "this is a stretch, I expect it to be uncomfortable, and I am not expecting it to be perfect." Without that, the person assumes they are being measured at their normal standard and hides the difficulty.
- Announced, not gifted. Where more than one person could take it, say it is available. Unadvertised stretch work follows the manager's network by default, which is the mechanism behind the promotion-evidence gap in the leader track.
Self-studyWhen someone does not want to grow2 min read▶
Some people are doing the job they want, at the level they want, and have no interest in a growth plan. This is a legitimate position and managers handle it badly in both directions.
- Do not pathologise it. A steady, capable person delivering well is valuable, and treating contentment as a performance concern is how you convert a good employee into a resentful one.
- Do not assume it either. "Not ambitious" is one of the most common unfounded assumptions made about people, particularly about anyone with caring responsibilities or a quiet manner - and the leader track shows what happens when that assumption is recorded in a talent review without ever being asked. Ask the question.
- Do keep the skills current. Even with no promotion ambition, the role will change under them. Growth aimed at staying good at the job is still growth.
- Do revisit annually. Ambition is not a fixed trait; it moves with life circumstances in both directions.
Write a real growth goal for Priya ★ 12 min · everyone tries
From the matrix: Priya is learning forecasting and has no pricing-model exposure. Write one goal with all five parts, and notice how much of the work is finding the right existing project rather than writing.
Pick the gap. One only - forecasting, because it is already blocking her current work and the matrix shows two people who can teach it.
Find the work. What is already on the plan this quarter that requires forecasting? Do not invent a project.
Name the teacher and get their agreement on actual hours. An unconsulted teacher is not a teacher.
Write the evidence: what will be observably true in eight weeks that is not true now.
Set the checkpoint inside the quarter, and put it in the calendar during the session.
| Part | Weak version | Workable version |
|---|---|---|
| Gap | "Develop analytical skills" | "Build the seasonal forecast independently" |
| Work | none named | "On the autumn range plan, which needs a forecast in week 6 anyway" |
| Teacher | none | "Tomas, two hours a week for four weeks - agreed with him" |
| Evidence | "Improved confidence" | "Produces the autumn forecast; Tomas's review finds assumptions to discuss, not errors to correct" |
| Checkpoint | "Annual review" | "Week 4 - is the method landing? And week 8 on the output" |
Stress-test a stretch assignment ★ 8 min · do your own
Take a stretch you are considering giving someone and run the five design checks. Most fail on the safety net and the framing.
Name the realistic worst case if it goes badly. If it involves a major client or a quarter's numbers, redesign the scope.
Name who is watching and the point at which they step in.
Decide how help arrives without being a public rescue.
Write the framing sentence you will actually say about it being a stretch.
Check who else could have been offered it, and whether they were.
The stretch that was a trap. Cartwheel gave a mid-level analyst the supplier renegotiation for its largest account as a development opportunity. No safety net, no framing, and a failure mode that would have cost real margin for a year. She spent six weeks terrified, escalated nothing because she believed she was being tested, and the deal came in worse than the previous one. The organisation recorded it as evidence she was not ready for more. The design was the problem: same growth, achieved safely, would have been the third-largest account with the category manager reviewing at the halfway point and an explicit "this is a stretch, tell me when it gets hard."
Try it yourself - this week ◐ 30-45 min total
- Build the skills matrix with your team, not about them. Note the surprises.
- Read the columns and find any skill only one person can teach. That is your risk, and it is also somebody's growth goal.
- Write one five-part growth goal for one person, riding on work that already exists.
- Get the teacher's actual agreement on hours before you write their name down.
- Run the five stretch checks on any stretch assignment currently in flight, and fix the safety net.
- Ask anyone you have assumed is "not ambitious" what they actually want. You may be carrying an unexamined assumption.
Sources covered (cited)
Taught from development practice and the management canon. This session covers:
Three questions before you go 🎯 ◐ 90 seconds
1 · Why should the top level of a skills matrix be "can teach it" rather than "expert"?
"Expert" is a self-assessment; "has taught this to someone who can now do it" is a fact. And if the top level requires teaching, developing your strongest people automatically reduces the single-point-of-failure risk you can read down the columns.
2 · A growth plan lists five development goals and a course to attend, reviewed at the next annual cycle. What is the core problem?
One goal, riding on work that was going to happen anyway, with a named teacher who has agreed the hours, observable evidence, and a checkpoint weeks away. Anything requiring extra carved-out time loses to delivery every quarter.
3 · What makes a stretch assignment a trap rather than a development opportunity?
Safe-to-fail, a named watcher with an agreed intervention point, help that is not a public rescue, and an explicit "this is a stretch, I do not expect perfect". Without the framing the person assumes they are being measured normally and escalates nothing.