Many leadership assessments describe personality or style. The Leadership Stability Index™ looks at twelve observable leadership situations from the past 30 days, including stalled strategic trade-offs, concentrated decision authority, and the effect of pressure on judgment.
It is a self-report of behavior, not a verdict on who you are or a diagnosis of organizational risk. Its purpose is to identify one constraint worth examining while the stakes are still manageable.
What it asks
The twelve statements are grouped under the three capabilities of the C³ Protocol, four each. You answer each one on a five-point scale, from Never to Almost always.
Clarity
Whether strategic priorities, trade-offs, and consequential decisions move with a shared understanding. For example: “An important initiative slowed because senior leaders waited for me to resolve competing priorities.”
Capacity
Whether decision authority, critical context, and accountability extend beyond the person at the top. For example: “A cross-functional issue returned to me because leaders could not agree who owned the decision.”
Composure
Whether pressure changes the quality of consequential decisions and conversations. For example: “I postponed a difficult leadership conversation until it began affecting decisions or performance.”
Leadership context
After the statements, we ask which role you hold and offer two optional context questions about the team you lead and the stakes you are navigating. Those answers help point you toward a relevant next conversation or resource. They do not affect the numerical score or imply a benchmark for your industry or stage.
How it is scored
Each of the three capabilities gets a score from 0 to 100, and the overall score weights all twelve statements equally. Higher scores mean you reported fewer of the listed situations.
For easier reading, scores are grouped into three descriptive bands based on average response frequency. From 75 to 100 means you reported the situations as rarely or never. From 51 to 74 falls between rarely and sometimes. From 0 to 50 means they occurred at least sometimes on average. These are interpretation aids, not population norms or validated risk thresholds.
What your result shows
The result leads with one behavior rather than a label. It takes your most frequent answer and shows what you reported, what that pattern may be costing you, and one move to try the next time it happens. If a second situation in a different capability is nearly as frequent, the result names a shared pattern instead.
If every answer is Never or Rarely, the result says so. It points to what is working and how to protect it as the business grows, rather than inventing a problem.
What it is not
It is not a clinical evaluation, a psychological test, a ranking against other leaders, an enterprise-valuation model, or a prediction of results. External leadership research and anonymized observations have informed the topics and language, but they do not validate this instrument or justify a claim that a specific score predicts company performance.
The assessment is being refined. Each result records its question version so earlier responses are interpreted against the questions actually answered. Scores from materially different versions should not be treated as directly comparable.
Because it is a self-report, it is only as useful as your honesty about what actually happened. Answer from the past 30 days, not from how you would like to lead.
Who it is for
Founders, chief executives, and senior leaders navigating growth, change, and complex teams. It reflects the individual leader's experience and should not be presented as an independent audit of an executive team or company.
Where the research fits
We use outside research to test whether the issues we ask about matter in the wider leadership environment. Harvard Business Impact's 2026 Global Leadership Study examines leadership under ongoing change. The World Economic Forum and McKinsey's The Human Advantage discusses capabilities needed as work evolves. Gallup's State of the Global Workplace data provides context on manager and employee engagement. These sources inform the relevance of the subject, not the accuracy of an individual's LSI score.
Our previous assessments and client observations have also surfaced recurring questions about clarity, ownership, and leadership pressure. They are qualitative inputs drawn from different instruments and audiences, not a representative comparison cohort. We do not infer psychometric validity from response volume.
Your privacy
You answer the statements without an account. At the end, you enter your first name and email so we can send you a private link to your result, along with the weekly stability briefing and occasional invitations to programs and events. You can unsubscribe anytime.
The link rebuilds your result in your browser, and your answers travel inside the link itself. Anyone who has the link can see that result, so treat it as you would any other personal document.
What happens after you take it
Some leaders use the result as a private gut check and test the first move. Others need a conversation about the executive team or the pressure they are personally carrying. The next-step invitation considers your role and current context, not a fabricated severity threshold. If you retake the assessment, compare responses only when the question version matches.