coach manager

<required_reading>

Read these reference files before coaching:

1. references/primary-traits.md - A, B, C, D trait details and management approaches
2. references/secondary-traits.md - EU, L, I traits
3. references/patterns-archetypes.md - Pattern identification

</required_reading>

<purpose>

Help managers work more effectively with their direct reports by comparing Culture Index profiles and providing specific coaching recommendations. This workflow translates trait differences into actionable management adjustments.

</purpose> <process>

Step 1: Load Both Profiles

Gather the manager and direct report's profiles:

Manager: [Name]
- Pattern: [Archetype]
- A: [position relative to arrow]
- B: [position relative to arrow]
- C: [position relative to arrow]
- D: [position relative to arrow]
- EU Survey/Job: [values]

Direct Report: [Name]
- Pattern: [Archetype]
- A: [position relative to arrow]
- B: [position relative to arrow]
- C: [position relative to arrow]
- D: [position relative to arrow]
- EU Survey/Job: [values]

Step 2: Calculate Trait Gaps

For each trait, calculate the gap between manager and direct report:

Friction risk guide:

• Same side of arrow, similar distance: Low friction
• Same side of arrow, different distance: Medium friction
• Opposite sides of arrow: High friction potential

Step 3: Identify Primary Friction Points

Flag the largest gaps (opposite sides of arrow or >3 centile difference):

Common friction patterns:

Step 4: Generate Communication Adjustments

Based on direct report's traits, recommend specific adjustments:

If direct report is High A:

• Use bullet points focused on ROI, not paragraphs
• Give outcomes ("bake me a cake"), not step-by-step instructions
• Ask questions to get buy-in, don't dictate
• Allow autonomy - avoid micromanagement
• Be direct and confident - they don't respect hesitation

If direct report is Low A:

• Provide specific direction before expecting action
• Give frameworks for novel decisions
• Offer specific praise, not general ("Great job on X")
• Probe for concerns - silence doesn't mean agreement
• Don't misread helpfulness as ambition

If direct report is High B:

• Allow time for rapport before tasks
• Verbal praise and public recognition matter
• Include in social activities
• Don't isolate with extended solo work
• Remember: first statement isn't final position (verbal processor)

If direct report is Low B:

• Minimize unnecessary check-ins
• Use async communication (email) over meetings
• Private recognition, not public praise
• Thoughtful gestures over verbal affirmation
• Don't mistake quiet for disengagement

If direct report is High C:

• Send agendas in advance
• One topic per meeting
• Protect their focus time (28-min recovery from interruptions)
• Provide advance notice of changes
• Give structured, sequential instructions

If direct report is Low C:

• Put deadlines in subject lines
• Keep them busy with variety
• Expect them to interrupt - plan for it
• Use their urgency productively
• Don't be surprised by over-commitment

If direct report is High D:

• Frame feedback as process improvement, not personal criticism
• Provide training/learning opportunities
• Don't break trust - they have long memories
• Build SOPs for new responsibilities
• Recognize their attention to quality

If direct report is Low D:

• Give creative problems to solve
• Provide options, not mandates
• Build systems to catch their gaps
• Focus on the 3 things that matter most
• Accept 80% completion; assign finishers

Step 5: Design 1:1 Structure

Based on trait comparison, recommend 1:1 format:

Frequency:

• Low A direct report: More frequent (weekly)
• High A direct report: Less frequent (bi-weekly or as needed)
• High C direct report: Consistent schedule, same time/day
• Low C direct report: Flexible timing, short check-ins ok

Duration:

• High B direct report: Allow buffer for rapport
• Low B direct report: Keep focused and efficient
• High C direct report: Single-topic, predictable length
• Low C direct report: Can be shorter, faster-paced

Format:

• High D direct report: Structured agenda, action items
• Low D direct report: Flexible, allow tangents
• High B direct report: Start with personal connection
• Low B direct report: Start with business

Sample 1:1 template for [Direct Report's Pattern]:

1. [Opening based on B trait]
2. [Agenda item structure based on C/D traits]
3. [Feedback approach based on A trait]
4. [Closing/action items based on D trait]

Step 6: Identify Motivators

Based on direct report's profile, their primary motivators are:

Step 7: Flag Energy Concerns

Check EU utilization:

• Survey EU: [value]
• Job EU: [value]
• Utilization: [Job/Survey × 100]%

Step 8: Compile Coaching Summary

## Manager Coaching Guide: [Manager] → [Direct Report]

**Date:** [Date]
**Manager Pattern:** [Archetype]
**Direct Report Pattern:** [Archetype]

### Key Trait Gaps
| Trait | Gap | Adjustment Needed |
|-------|-----|-------------------|
| [Trait] | [difference] | [specific adjustment] |

### Communication Style Adjustments
1. [Specific adjustment based on their traits]
2. [Specific adjustment based on their traits]
3. [Specific adjustment based on their traits]

### 1:1 Recommendations
- **Frequency:** [recommendation]
- **Duration:** [recommendation]
- **Format:** [recommendation]
- **Opening:** [how to start based on B trait]
- **Feedback:** [how to deliver based on A/D traits]

### Primary Motivators
1. [Motivator 1] - [how to implement]
2. [Motivator 2] - [how to implement]

### Watch Areas
- [Potential friction point 1]
- [Potential friction point 2]

### Energy Status
- EU Utilization: [percentage]
- Status: [Healthy/Watch/Concern/Stress]
- Action: [if any]

### Things to Avoid
- [Anti-pattern for this direct report]
- [Anti-pattern for this direct report]

</process>

<anti_patterns>

Avoid these coaching mistakes:

• Expecting them to change: Survey traits are hardwired - change the environment, not the person
• Projecting your motivators: What motivates you may demotivate them
• One-size-fits-all 1:1s: Adapt format to their profile
• Ignoring EU signals: Low utilization predicts disengagement and flight risk
• Treating gaps as problems: Different profiles bring complementary strengths
• Forgetting your own biases: Your profile affects how you perceive theirs

</anti_patterns>

<success_criteria>

Manager coaching is complete when:

• Both profiles loaded and compared
• All trait gaps calculated with friction risk
• Primary friction points identified
• Communication adjustments specified for each major trait
• 1:1 structure designed for their profile
• Motivators identified with implementation suggestions
• EU utilization checked and flagged if concerning
• Watch areas documented
• Anti-patterns for this pairing noted

</success_criteria>