Leadership Inputs-and-Outputs Scorecard
Judge leaders by team results and the behaviors used to produce them.
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 5
- Confidence
- 96%
The Leadership Inputs-and-Outputs Scorecard evaluates a leader through the team they create. Outputs include whether the team consistently gets results. Inputs include the culture, cooperation, values, and treatment of people that produce those results. Looking only at outputs can reward leaders who hit targets through shortcuts, intimidation, undercutting, or other behavior that weakens the organization. Looking only at positive relationships can excuse a team that never performs. The evaluator therefore inspects both dimensions and treats the team below the leader as the primary evidence. An important exception is a new leader who inherited a poor team: in that case, evaluate whether the team is improving or degrading over an appropriate period rather than attributing the inherited condition immediately.
Origin
Extracted from The Jasmine Star Show during Leila Hormozi’s answer to how someone can identify a bad boss and how she measures leaders inside her own company.
Core principles
- 01A leader’s team is evidence of their leadership.
- 02Results alone can conceal harmful methods.
- 03Culture without results is also insufficient.
- 04Good leadership produces sustainable outcomes through acceptable behaviors.
How to run it
- 1
Establish the inherited baseline
Determine whether the leader built the team or recently inherited it, and document the team’s starting condition.
Pro tip For inherited teams, evaluate the direction of change rather than only the current state.
Watch out Holding a new leader solely responsible for inherited dysfunction produces a misleading score.
- 2
Measure outputs
Assess whether the team reliably achieves the results for which it is accountable.
Pro tip Use multiple periods or projects instead of one exceptional success or failure.
Watch out Do not stop the evaluation after finding strong results.
- 3
Measure team culture
Examine whether team members cooperate, help one another, and maintain a healthy working environment.
Pro tip Seek evidence from behavior, retention, and peer interactions rather than slogans.
Watch out Personal likability is not equivalent to a strong culture.
- 4
Measure values and methods
Investigate whether the leader and team uphold organizational values while producing results.
Pro tip Look specifically for shortcuts, undercutting, mistreatment, or concealed costs.
Watch out A harmful method can make short-term performance appear stronger than it is.
- 5
Combine inputs and outputs
Classify the leader based on both the quality of the results and the quality of the process that produced them.
Pro tip Require strength on both dimensions for a top assessment.
Watch out Do not average severe ethical or cultural violations into an otherwise acceptable score.
In the wild
A manager repeatedly hits revenue targets, but team members undercut one another, values are ignored, and turnover rises. An output-only review calls the manager successful; the combined scorecard reveals that the methods are degrading the organization.
→ The company avoids rewarding destructive leadership solely because it produces short-term results.
A recently hired executive takes over a poorly performing department. Rather than scoring the executive immediately from the inherited condition, the evaluator records the baseline and watches whether results, cooperation, and values improve or degrade.
→ The assessment attributes performance more fairly while preserving accountability for the direction of change.
Common mistakes
Measuring results alone
This can classify harmful leaders as effective because the hidden human and cultural costs are excluded.
Mistaking likability for leadership
A pleasant personality does not prove that a leader creates capable teams or gets results.
Ignoring the inherited baseline
A leader who recently inherited dysfunction needs enough time for their influence on the team to become observable.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for evaluating managers, executives, and internal leadership candidates who already oversee a team.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal for judging a newly appointed leader who inherited a damaged team before enough time has passed to observe a trend.
From the transcript
“I would say that the measurement of a boss is the team.”
“it's not just about the output, it's about the inputs to get the result.”
“And I think you have to measure them on both.”
From the episode
The Truth About Scaling, Criticism, and Letting Go with Leila Hormozi