“I assume my team knows what ‘good’ looks like… yet I still find myself reviewing and fixing things late at night.”
A client shared this with me during a coaching session. It sounds harmless. Almost reasonable. Look closer, though, and it reveals something else entirely: we’re relying on unspoken expectations. And that comes at a cost rework, frustration, creeping micromanagement, and a gradual erosion of trust.
The leadership shift here isn’t about communicating more. It’s about communicating what actually matters:
- What success looks like
- How it will be evaluated
- Who owns what
- When “done” is truly done
In short: stop assuming. Start making expectations and success criteria explicit.
Why this matters for leaders
Assumptions don’t fail because people are careless. They fail because modern work is:
- Fast
- Fragmented
- Interrupted by constant meetings and handoffs
- Full of cross-functional ambiguity
In a study of senior executives:
- 65% said meetings interrupt their ability to get work done
- 71% considered meetings unproductive
- 64% said meetings take time away from strategic thinking
These are precisely the conditions in which assumptions multiply.
When expectations aren’t explicit, people fill the gaps with their own interpretations. Leaders often read the outcome as “lack of ownership” or “incompetence,” when it’s more often a lack of clarity.
This is where Marshall Goldsmith’s perspective is helpful: it’s not only external barriers that keep patterns alive it’s our own beliefs and habits. In this case, the belief is simple and costly: “If I’ve said it once, it should be obvious.”
The hidden cost of “assuming”
When expectations remain implicit, five predictable outcomes show up: Rework becomes normal. The work is “almost right,” but never quite there.
Speed increases while clarity drops. Teams move fast often in the wrong direction.
Trust erodes on both sides:
– The leader thinks: “I can’t rely on them.”
– The team thinks: “It’s never enough.”
People start managing the leader instead of the work optimising for preferences rather than outcomes. Leadership time gets diverted. Instead of thinking, you’re checking.
This is why the habit of “assuming they know” is so expensive: it quietly turns leaders into quality-control machines.
A key distinction: expectations are not success criteria
Many leaders share expectations but skip the crucial step of defining how success will be recognised.
Expectations sound like:
– “Make it solid.”
– “Keep it high-level.”
– “Get it ready for the client.”
Success criteria sound like:
“One page. Three options. One clear recommendation. Top three risks. Budget range. By Friday at 5pm.”
“If a stakeholder reads this in 90 seconds, the decision should be clear.”
Expectations are subjective.
Success criteria are observable.
And what’s observable can be improved.
Five common leadership mistakes when defining “success”
- Assuming your definition of “good” is shared
Your team may aim for “completed” while you expect “board-ready.”
Correction: define the quality bar examples, format, depth. - Assuming priorities are obvious
People can’t see your internal ranking of what matters most.
Correction: state the trade-offs speed over perfection, or accuracy over speed. - Assuming ownership is clear
Cross-functional work blurs accountability.
Correction: name a clear owner and what ownership actually means decisions, alignment, approvals. - Assuming people know how you’ll judge the outcome
They optimise for what they think you value.
Correction: make evaluation criteria explicit what must be present, what to avoid. - Assuming one message is enough in an overloaded system
Attention is scarce. Work is fragmented.
Correction: build in a short alignment checkpoint before final delivery.
The one-pager: expectations + success criteria
Here’s a practical template you can use for any assignment. It takes 3–5 minutes and saves hours.
- Outcome: What should be true when this is complete?
- Observable success criteria
- Format (one page, slides, email?)
- Scope (what’s in / what’s out)
- Quality standard (examples, tone, level of detail)
- Decision rule (what counts as “approved”)
- Constraints: time, budget, stakeholders, dependencies
- Ownership: who owns what, who needs to be consulted
- Checkpoint: a quick alignment moment at 20–30% progress
This is the leadership version of a “definition of done.” It’s not bureaucracy. It’s leverage.
If you want less micromanagement, less frustration, and more trust, don’t start by trying to “delegate more.” Start here: make expectations and success criteria explicit.
When success is visible, people can work autonomously. Feedback becomes objective. Trust grows faster. And leaders stop being the safety net.
This week, pick one task you’re delegating and ask yourself: “If someone delivered this perfectly, what would I see exactly?”
Write it. Share it. And watch what changes.
If this resonates, pass it on to someone who could benefit from it.
Four ways to strengthen leadership expectations
Four practical leadership tips
Replace ‘Do your best’ with ‘Here is what success looks like’. Ask yourself: if I had to evaluate this, what would I base it on? Then share those criteria with your team.
Use a two-minute ‘reverse brief’. After assigning a task, ask: ‘Can you walk me through how you’ve interpreted success and how you plan to achieve it?’ This is the fastest way to surface misunderstandings early.
Build an ‘alignment moment’ into the workflow. Not a long meeting, but a quick direction check. This matters because calendars are already overloaded the goal is not more meetings, but clarity at the right moment.
Make criteria visible, not just in your head. Write them down: In the task description In the project document In the follow-up email
Clarity that is not documented becomes tribal knowledge and tribal knowledge leads to rework.
Reflection exercise to clarify leadership expectations
To break the habit of assuming, try this exercise I suggested to a client:
- What am I assuming about my team?
- What might my team be assuming about me?
Then add a third question:
- Which of these assumptions should become explicit expectations or success criteria?
It is in this final step that leadership behaviours begin to change.
Why is it important to make leadership expectations explicit?
Clear expectations prevent misunderstandings and rework. When leaders articulate what success looks like, teams align faster, micromanagement drops, and trust increases. The result is higher effectiveness and greater autonomy without sacrificing standards.
How can leaders define success criteria effectively?
By anchoring expectations to observable outcomes. Be specific about deliverables, scope, quality standards, and decision rights. A structured definition of success removes ambiguity and makes it easier for teams to execute with confidence.
What common mistakes do leaders make around expectations?
The most frequent ones are assuming everyone shares the same definition of “good” and that priorities are self-evident. Effective leaders clarify ownership, evaluation criteria, and crucially repeat the message. Consistency is what turns clarity into performance.
