Self

Boss

Direct Report

Peer

11

11

8

27

LEA 360 Composite Profile

Executive Team

Normative Group: General Europe n=45621

Number of Respondents:Sample

Creating a Vision Developing Followership Implementing the

Vision

Following

Through

Achieving Results Team Playing

Self

Self - 11

LEADERSHIP EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSISäGeneral Europe n=45621

© 2016 Management Research Group Executive Team

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Con

serv

ative

Inno

vativ

e

Techn

ical

Self

Strate

gic

Persu

asive

Out

going

Excite

men

t

Res

traint

Struct

uring

Tactic

al

Com

mun

icat

ion

Deleg

ation

Con

trol

Feedb

ack

Man

agem

ent F

ocus

Dom

inan

t

Produ

ction

Coo

pera

tion

Con

sens

ual

Autho

rity

Empa

thy

1

Sample

Creating a Vision Developing Followership Implementing the

Vision

Following

Through

Achieving Results Team Playing

Self - 11 Boss - 11

LEADERSHIP EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSISä

Self vs. Boss Profile SummaryGeneral Europe n=45621

© 2016 Management Research Group Executive Team

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Con

serv

ative

Inno

vativ

e

Techn

ical

Self

Strate

gic

Persu

asive

Out

going

Excite

men

t

Res

traint

Structur

ing

Tactic

al

Com

mun

icat

ion

Deleg

ation

Con

trol

Feedb

ack

Man

agem

ent F

ocus

Dom

inan

t

Produ

ction

Coo

pera

tion

Con

sens

ual

Autho

rity

Empa

thy

2

Sample

Creating a Vision Developing Followership Implementing the

Vision

Following

ThroughAchieving Results Team Playing

Self - 11 Peer - 8

LEADERSHIP EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSISäSelf vs. Peer Profile Summary

General Europe n=45621

© 2016 Management Research Group Executive Team

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Con

serv

ative

Inno

vativ

e

Techn

ical

Self

Strate

gic

Persu

asive

Out

going

Excite

men

t

Res

traint

Structur

ing

Tactic

al

Com

mun

icat

ion

Deleg

ation

Con

trol

Feedb

ack

Man

agem

ent F

ocus

Dom

inan

t

Produ

ction

Coo

pera

tion

Con

sens

ual

Autho

rity

Empa

thy

3

Sample

Creating a Vision Developing Followership Implementing the

Vision

Following

ThroughAchieving Results Team Playing

Direct Report - 27Self - 11

LEADERSHIP EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSISäSelf vs. Direct Report Profile Summary

General Europe n=45621

© 2016 Management Research Group Executive Team

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Con

serv

ative

Inno

vativ

e

Techn

ical

Self

Strate

gic

Persu

asive

Out

going

Excite

men

t

Res

traint

Struct

uring

Tactic

al

Com

mun

icat

ion

Deleg

ation

Con

trol

Feedb

ack

Man

agem

ent F

ocus

Dom

inan

t

Produ

ction

Coo

pera

tion

Con

sens

ual

Autho

rity

Empa

thy

4

Sample

Creating a Vision Developing Followership Implementing the

Vision

Following

Through

Achieving ResultsTeam Playing

Self - 11 Boss - 11Direct Report - 27 Peer - 8

LEADERSHIP EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSISä

Self vs. Observer Profile SummaryGeneral Europe n=45621

© 2016 Management Research Group Executive Team

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Con

serv

ative

Inno

vativ

e

Techn

ical

Self

Strate

gic

Persu

asive

Out

going

Excite

men

t

Res

traint

Struct

uring

Tactic

al

Com

mun

icat

ion

Deleg

ation

Con

trol

Feedb

ack

Man

agem

ent F

ocus

Dom

inan

t

Produ

ction

Coo

pera

tion

Con

sens

ual

Autho

rity

Empa

thy

5

Sample

Leadership

Effectiveness

Analysis™

Group Composite Profile

ABC Company

Executive Team

Number of Respondents:

Self Data: 11

Boss Data: 11

Peer Data: 8

Direct Report Data: 27

Normative Group: General Europe n=45621 (Jan2012)

Presented by: XYZ Consulting

Revised: ENU-04/01

Copyright © 1992, 1994, 1998 Management Research Group

Portland, Maine USA

All Rights Reserved

Sample

Leadership Effectiveness Analysisä

Median/Frequency – Self DataGroup Composite Profile

Leadership 360Ò

Executive Team

# of Respondents: 11

HIGHHI-

MID

MID-RANGELOW-

MID

LOW

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Creating a Vision

Conservative l % 75 1 2 1 2 2 1 2

Innovative l % 45 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1

Technical l % 90 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2

Self l % 50 1 3 4 1 2

Strategic l % 60 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Developing Followership

Persuasive % 20l 3 1 3 3 1

Outgoing l % 40 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

Excitement % 10l 3 3 2 2 1

Restraint l % 75 1 1 1 3 2 2 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Implementing the Vision

Structuring l % 85 1 1 2 2 4 1

Tactical l % 85 1 3 1 2 2 2

Communication l % 75 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1

Delegation l % 55 1 3 1 1 1 2 2

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Following Through

Control l % 55 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

Feedback l % 55 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Achieving Results

Management Focus l % 70 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1

Dominant l % 55 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

Production l % 45 2 2 1 1 1 3 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Team Playing

Cooperation l % 60 1 2 2 1 2 2 1

Consensual l % 65 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2

Authority l % 95 2 1 1 2 5

Empathy l % 25 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 1

Portland, Maine USA

Copyright © 1992, 1994, 1998 Management Research Group®

General Europe n=45621 (Jan2012)

Range Profile: LEA SD Ranges for Samples

Sample

Leadership Effectiveness AnalysisäLeadership 360Ò

Median/Frequency - Boss DataGroup Composite Profile

Executive Team

# of Respondents: 11

HIGHHI-

MID

MID-RANGELOW-

MID

LOW

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Creating a Vision

Conservative l % 85 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2

Innovative l % 45 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1

Technical l % 75 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3

Self l % 40 3 1 2 1 2 1 1

Strategic l % 75 1 2 1 1 4 1 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Developing Followership

Persuasive l % 35 1 2 3 1 2 1 1

Outgoing l % 45 3 1 2 2 1 1 1

Excitement l % 35 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1

Restraint l % 65 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Implementing the Vision

Structuring l % 55 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 1

Tactical l % 45 1 1 1 3 3 1 1

Communication l % 75 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

Delegation l % 70 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Following Through

Control l % 45 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1

Feedback l % 30 3 3 1 1 1 1 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Achieving Results

Management Focus l % 55 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1

Dominant l % 60 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2

Production l % 50 2 1 2 3 1 1 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Team Playing

Cooperation l % 75 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1

Consensual l % 60 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2

Authority l % 65 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1

Empathy l % 65 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

Range Profile: LEA SD Ranges for Samples

Copyright © 1992, 1994, 1998 Management Research Group®

Portland, Maine USA

General Europe n=45621 (Jan2012)

Sample

Leadership Effectiveness AnalysisäLeadership 360Ò

Median/Frequency - Peer DataGroup Composite Profile

Executive Team

# of Respondents: 8

HIGHHI-

MID

MID-RANGELOW-

MID

LOW

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Creating a Vision

Conservative l % 65 1 1 2 1 2 1

Innovative l % 65 2 1 2 1 1 1

Technical l % 90 1 1 1 3 2

Self l % 25 1 2 1 1 1 1 1

Strategic l % 65 1 1 1 1 1 2 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Developing Followership

Persuasive l % 30 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

Outgoing l % 40 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

Excitement l % 35 3 1 2 2

Restraint l % 55 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Implementing the Vision

Structuring l % 60 1 3 1 2 1

Tactical l % 75 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

Communication l % 50 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

Delegation l % 65 1 1 1 1 2 1 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Following Through

Control l % 55 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

Feedback l % 45 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Achieving Results

Management Focus l % 70 1 2 1 1 2 1

Dominant l % 60 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

Production l % 70 1 1 1 1 1 2 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+

Team Playing

Cooperation l % 75 1 1 2 2 1 1

Consensual l % 60 2 1 2 1 1 1

Authority l % 65 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Empathy l % 35 1 2 1 1 2 1

Range Profile: LEA SD Ranges for Samples

Copyright © 1992, 1994, 1998 Management Research Group®

Portland, Maine USA

General Europe n=45621 (Jan2012)

Sample

Leadership Effectiveness AnalysisäLeadership 360Ò

Median/Frequency - Direct Report DataGroup Composite Profile

Executive Team

# of Respondents: 27

HIGHHI-

MID

MID-RANGELOW-

MID

LOW

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+Creating a Vision

Conservative l % 90 1 2 1 4 1 1 3 5 2 7

Innovative l % 40 2 1 1 2 2 4 1 3 1 2 1 3 2 2

Technical l % 60 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 4

Self l % 45 3 1 5 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

Strategic l % 60 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 4 1 2 2 2 2 3

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+Developing Followership

Persuasive l % 30 3 2 2 3 1 3 1 4 1 1 1 1 3 1

Outgoing l % 40 1 2 3 5 1 2 1 2 1 4 1 2 1 1

Excitement % 15l 3 6 6 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1

Restraint l % 70 2 3 4 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 2 4 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+Implementing the Vision

Structuring l % 85 1 2 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 5

Tactical l % 50 2 2 6 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 1

Communication l % 70 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 5 2 1 1 3 1 3

Delegation l % 70 1 2 1 2 4 1 1 5 2 1 1 3 3

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+Following Through

Control l % 55 3 1 1 2 1 3 2 5 1 3 1 1 2 1

Feedback l % 60 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 2 3 1 2 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+Achieving Results

Management Focus l % 50 1 1 2 2 2 5 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 3

Dominant l % 50 1 2 5 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 2 3 1

Production l % 50 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 3 5 2 2 1

10 6020 30 40 50 70 80 90 96+Team Playing

Cooperation l % 55 1 1 4 3 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 4

Consensual l % 70 1 2 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 2 4 1 3 3

Authority l % 70 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 4 2 1 3 2 5

Empathy l % 40 1 2 3 2 5 1 2 1 3 2 2 1 1 1

Range Profile: LEA SD Ranges for Samples

Copyright © 1992, 1994, 1998 Management Research Group®

Portland, Maine USA

General Europe n=45621 (Jan2012)

Sample