coaching-calibrator

coaching-calibrator

Purpose

Given an engineer and a specific task, recommends how to lead the hand-off (how much direction, how much support) using Situational Leadership II. It stops the most common management mistake: leading everyone the same way.

When to use

Deciding how to delegate, coach, support, or develop someone on a particular task or skill.

When not to

General performance reviews, or anything not tied to a specific task. SLII is per-task by design; a person is a different development level on different work.

Foundation — Situational Leadership II

There is no single best leadership style. Match the style to the person's development level on that task.

Development level combines two independent things:

• Competence — demonstrated skill and knowledge on this task.
• Commitment — motivation and confidence on this task.

Level	Competence	Commitment	Looks like
D1	Low	High	Enthusiastic beginner — eager, hasn't done it
D2	Low–some	Low	Disillusioned learner — hit the hard part, confidence dropped
D3	Moderate–high	Variable / low confidence	Capable but cautious — can do it, doubts it
D4	High	High	Self-reliant achiever — competent and confident

Style matches level: D1 → S1 Directing, D2 → S2 Coaching, D3 → S3 Supporting, D4 → S4 Delegating.

See the SLII foundation for the full model.

How it works

1. Establish the specific task. If the request is about a person in general ("how do I manage Sarah"), ask: on what task or skill area? Never diagnose a person globally.
2. Gather signals — competence and commitment separately.
   • Competence: have they done this before? Successfully? Recently? Do they know the domain?
   • Commitment: are they motivated by it? Confident? Anxious? Have they hit a setback on it? If signals are missing, ask for them. Do not guess a level.
3. Diagnose the development level from the two reads.
4. Recommend the matching style as concrete behaviours — not just the label.
5. Flag the relevant classic error or regression risk.
6. Encourage the manager to share the diagnosis with the person — SLII works as a conversation, not a covert label.

Diagnosis — separate the two reads

Competence and commitment move independently. The most common diagnostic error is collapsing them:

• Low output is not always low competence. It is often low commitment: a capable person who is disillusioned (D2) or anxious (D3). Directing them harder makes it worse.
• Enthusiasm is not competence. An eager, confident person who has never done the task is D1, not D4. The confidence fools managers into delegating.
• "Used to be great, now struggling" is usually a commitment drop or a regression, not lost skill.

Deceptive cases worth naming:

• High, reliable output but seeks reassurance and hedges decisions → D3, not D4. They need a sounding board, not a hand-off.
• Was a D4, then a failure / reorg / new stack → can regress to D2 on the same task. Development level is not a ratchet.

The four styles — concrete behaviours

S1 Directing — for D1

Eager, but hasn't done it. Give explicit steps and a clear definition of done; show them, or pair on the first instance; check in on progress frequently; most decisions are yours for now. Don't read their enthusiasm as readiness.

S2 Coaching — for D2

Hit the hard part; confidence has dropped. Still give direction, but now explain the why, not only the steps. Actively rebuild confidence; name what they are doing well. Involve them in decisions while still guiding. This is the most hands-on style: high direction and high support. Don't pull back early; D2 is where people quietly disengage.

S3 Supporting — for D3

Capable but cautious. Lead with encouragement; share decisions, and ask "what do you think?" before offering your view. Step back from directing; they know how. Help them trust their own judgement. Trap: treating a D3 like a D4 and going silent when they need a sounding board.

S4 Delegating — for D4

Competent and confident. Hand over the outcome and the decisions; agree what success looks like, then get out of the way. Stay available without hovering. Recognise the work. Trap: over-directing. A micromanaged D4 disengages, or leaves.

Common errors to flag

• One style for everyone — the laziest and most common failure.
• Delegating to a D1 — abandonment dressed up as empowerment.
• Over-directing a D4 — micromanagement; they regress or leave.
• Confusing D1 and D2 — both have low-ish competence, but D1 needs direction and D2 needs confidence rebuilt. Treat a D2 like a D1 and you crush already-low confidence.
• Ignoring regression — re-diagnose after a failure, a reorg, or a tech change. The level can drop.

Output format

**Task:** <the specific task — restated to confirm it is specific>

**Diagnosis**
- Competence: <low / some / moderate–high / high> — <reasoning>
- Commitment: <high / low / variable> — <reasoning>
- Development level: **D<n>**

**Recommended style: S<n> <name>**
<2–4 concrete behaviours for this week — what to actually do>

**Watch for:** <the relevant classic error or regression risk>

**Share it:** <how to name this diagnosis with the person — SLII is a conversation>

If competence or commitment signals are missing, ask for them rather than producing a diagnosis.

Rules

• Always anchor to a specific task. The same person is a different level on different work.
• Never guess a development level — if the signals are not there, ask.
• Recommend behaviours, never just the style label.
• The diagnosis is shared with the person, not a covert label applied to them.