Lyntharis® Puls
Strictly confidential · for the client only
Sample
Plain-language report · Leadership potential
Leadership Potential Analysis
Candidate: Andrea B. · before promotion to team lead · July 2026
6 competency areas
1 self-assessment
5 external assessments
ready with development
Lyntharis® Puls
Andrea B. · July 2026 · Sample
The recommendation
The result in one sentence
Recommendation
Ready with targeted development
Andrea B. brings a solid foundation for a leadership role — strong self-management, genuine impact within the team, and a willingness to learn. Before taking on the role, we recommend targeted development in two areas: communication under pressure and decision-readiness. With a supported handover, the role will be sustainable within 6 months.
Not yet readyFoundations missing; the role would currently be a risk for the person and the team.
Ready with developmentFoundation is there; develop two areas deliberately, then sustainable.
ReadyCan take on the role now.
What speaks for Andrea B.:
- Self-management & willingness to learn (external 8.0) — organises herself reliably, actively seeks feedback and acts on it. The most important basis for growing into the role.
- Social competence & team impact (external 8.1) — rated higher by the team than by herself. A quiet strength to build on.
Where development is needed:
- Communication (external 6.4, self-assessment 8.0) — the biggest blind spot: Andrea B. considers her communication clearer than it lands with the other person.
- Decision-readiness (external 5.2) — the lowest area; under uncertainty, decisions get postponed.
Lyntharis® Puls
Andrea B. · July 2026 · Sample
Self-assessment meets external view
Six competency areas compared
Deliberately without technical expertise and seniority — what is measured is what carries in a leadership function. Above, the self-assessment (Andrea B.); below, the external assessment (line manager + 4 colleagues — not individually attributed in the report). The gap between them is the real gold.
Self-assessment
External assessment (avg. of 5)
Social competence & team impactexternal 0.6 higher — quiet strength
Communicationself 1.6 higher — blind spot
Empathy & people orientationexternal 0.6 higher — well received
Organisation & prioritisationconsistently assessed
Decision-readinesslowest area — development
Self-management & willingness to learnconsistent — clear strength
Lyntharis® Puls
Andrea B. · July 2026 · Sample
Where self-assessment and external view diverge
Reading the gaps
It is not the individual value that decides, but the difference between the inside and outside view. It shows where development achieves the most.
Blind spot
Communication — self 8.0, external 6.4
The largest difference in the whole profile. Andrea B. experiences herself as clear and understandable; in the team, especially under time pressure, less lands than she thinks. Typical for technically strong people: their own train of thought is so clear that the explanation comes out too short. Easy to develop — once the blind spot is visible.
Development area
Decision-readiness — external 5.2
The lowest area, seen similarly by self and external assessment. When the facts are clear, Andrea B. decides reliably; under uncertainty she looks for reassurance longer than the team would like. In a leadership role this is demanded daily — hence a central development goal.
Hidden strength
Social competence & team impact — external 8.1, self 7.5
The team rates Andrea B. higher here than she rates herself. She underestimates her effect on others — a resource she may use more consciously in the leadership role. Such “quiet strengths” often carry a promotion further than the obvious ones.
Plain language: the pattern is favourable. The strengths (self-management, team impact) are stable and confirmed from outside. The construction sites (communication, decision-making) are nameable, can be made conscious, and are developable within 6 months — not an exclusion criterion, but a clear roadmap.
Lyntharis® Puls
Andrea B. · July 2026 · Sample
Concrete instead of gut feeling
Development plan for 6 months
Two goals, clearly prioritised. Not a scattergun of seminars, but targeted steps in everyday work — measurable at the next external assessment.
Goal 1 · Communication under pressure
Month 1–2Make feedback visible: in three conversations, actively ask “Did what I meant come across?”. Keep the blind spot conscious.
Month 3–6Before important messages, prepare 3 sentences (core message, why, next step). Support from a mentor or coaching.
ApproachNot a communication seminar, but training in real conversation: send, actively check whether it landed, adjust — this shrinks the blind spot step by step instead of just naming it.
CheckpointAfter month 2: get brief feedback from two conversation partners (understood – yes/no). After month 6: compare with the starting value (external assessment 6.4) in the follow-up analysis.
Goal 2 · Decision-readiness
Month 1–2Consciously make small decisions faster (48-hour rule). Distinguish: reversible vs. non-reversible.
Month 3–6Under uncertainty, document: “What do I know, what is missing, from when do I decide anyway?” Review with the line manager every 4 weeks.
ApproachNot more analysis, but a firm limit: first sort every decision as reversible/non-reversible, then set a 48-hour time box instead of weighing it up endlessly.
CheckpointLog decisions with a date in a short record. After month 2: has the time to decide noticeably dropped? After month 6: make the share of on-time decisions visible in the conversation with the line manager.
Support & verification
StructureMonthly 30-minute conversation with the line manager, always along the same three questions: What went well? Where is it still sticking? What changes before the next conversation? Optional: leadership coaching by Lyntharis.
Progress checkAfter 6 months, a shortened follow-up analysis — only the two areas, same scale as at the start. Progress becomes visible in the same numbers, not newly claimed.
Fair for everyone: this analysis is not a verdict, but a running start. Andrea B. receives a concrete path instead of being overwhelmed — and the team gets a leader who enters the role prepared.
Lyntharis® Puls
Andrea B. · July 2026 · Sample
Transparency
How this analysis came about
CollectionSelf-assessment by the candidate plus external assessment by the line manager and 4 individually selected colleagues — the report does not attribute answers to individuals. 24 questions across 6 competency areas (scale 0–10) plus open comments.
What is measuredDeliberately not technical expertise and not seniority, but what carries in a leadership function: social competence, communication, empathy, organisation, decision-readiness, self-management.
ConfidentialityExternal assessments are only reported as an average (at least 3 people). Individual answers are traceable to no one, not even to the client.
Recommendation logicThree levels — ready · ready with targeted development · not yet ready. What matters is the overall pattern of strengths, gaps and the ability to learn from feedback.
Data storageCollection and storage in Switzerland, compliant with the Swiss FADP. Results go exclusively to the client; the candidate receives a development conversation on request.
Quality checkAnalysed automatically, reviewed and written personally: Lydia Simon, MAS Human Resources Management, over 20 years of HR practice.
What next? On request, Lyntharis supports the development with leadership coaching or carries out the shortened follow-up analysis after 6 months — so that “ready with development” becomes a demonstrated “ready”.
Lyntharis® Puls
Lyntharis by Lydia Simon · Neuhausstrasse 7 · 8600 Dübendorf · info@lyntharis.com
Lyntharis® is a registered trademark (CH no. 850643). Sample report with fictional data.