Leadership Skills Performance Review Phrases: 100+ Examples

How do you capture nuanced leadership performance in a brief written comment? Performance reviews represent critical moments for leadership development, yet many managers struggle to articulate specific, actionable feedback that drives improvement. Research shows that employees who receive specific, behaviour-focused feedback improve performance 39% more than those receiving generic evaluations—making precise language essential.

Leadership skills performance review phrases should balance recognition of strengths with constructive guidance for development, providing clear examples that connect behaviours to outcomes. Effective phrases avoid vague descriptors like "good leader" in favour of specific observations: "Successfully navigated team through restructuring by conducting weekly check-ins and maintaining transparent communication, resulting in zero attrition during transition period."

What Makes Effective Leadership Performance Review Phrases?

Effective leadership performance review phrases share common characteristics that distinguish helpful feedback from generic platitudes. They provide specific examples rather than abstract judgments, describe observable behaviours rather than assumed intentions, connect actions to outcomes with clear cause-effect relationships, and offer balanced assessment acknowledging both strengths and development areas.

The most useful phrases follow the "Situation-Behaviour-Impact" framework: describing the context, the specific leadership action observed, and the measurable result. For example: "During Q3 product launch (situation), you established cross-functional collaboration protocols and weekly stakeholder updates (behaviour), resulting in on-time delivery and 95% stakeholder satisfaction scores (impact)."

Leadership Skills Performance Review Phrases by Competency

Strategic Thinking and Vision

Exceeds Expectations:

• "Demonstrates exceptional strategic foresight, anticipating market shifts six months ahead of competitors and positioning our division to capitalise on emerging opportunities"
• "Articulates compelling vision that connects daily operations to long-term objectives, evidenced by 85% of team members accurately describing strategic priorities in recent survey"
• "Develops innovative strategic initiatives that balance risk and opportunity, generating £2M in new revenue streams whilst maintaining operational stability"
• "Synthesises complex market data into actionable strategies, translating industry trends into concrete business plans that guide team priorities"
• "Challenges conventional thinking constructively, proposing alternative approaches that improved process efficiency by 40%"

Meets Expectations:

• "Understands organisational strategy and translates it into departmental objectives that align with broader company goals"
• "Contributes thoughtful input during strategic planning sessions, offering perspectives that consider multiple stakeholder interests"
• "Develops annual plans that balance short-term deliverables with long-term capability building"
• "Communicates strategic direction clearly to team members, ensuring understanding of priorities and rationale"
• "Adjusts tactical plans appropriately when strategic circumstances change, maintaining alignment with evolving objectives"

Needs Improvement:

• "Focuses primarily on immediate operational tasks without connecting daily work to broader strategic objectives or long-term vision"
• "Struggles to articulate clear strategic direction for the team, resulting in confusion about priorities and misaligned efforts"
• "Resists strategic changes, showing preference for familiar approaches even when circumstances demand new thinking"
• "Develops plans that address symptoms rather than root causes, missing opportunities for systemic improvements"
• "Would benefit from dedicating more time to strategic thinking rather than remaining exclusively focused on tactical execution"

Communication and Influence

Exceeds Expectations:

• "Adapts communication style masterfully across audiences, delivering technical details to specialists whilst presenting high-level implications to executives"
• "Builds consensus among diverse stakeholders with competing interests, facilitating agreement on contentious issues through skilled negotiation"
• "Communicates difficult messages with appropriate sensitivity whilst maintaining clarity, as demonstrated during restructuring announcement"
• "Actively listens to understand rather than merely respond, asking clarifying questions that surface underlying concerns and build trust"
• "Leverages storytelling effectively to make complex concepts accessible, increasing engagement scores in team meetings by 35%"

Meets Expectations:

• "Communicates clearly and professionally in both written and verbal formats, ensuring messages are understood by intended audiences"
• "Provides regular updates to stakeholders, keeping relevant parties informed of progress, challenges, and decisions"
• "Listens attentively during discussions and incorporates others' perspectives into decision-making processes"
• "Presents information in organised, logical manner that facilitates comprehension and productive dialogue"
• "Responds to communications promptly and thoroughly, addressing questions and concerns in timely fashion"

Needs Improvement:

• "Communications sometimes lack clarity or completeness, requiring follow-up questions to fully understand intentions or requirements"
• "Tends toward one-way communication rather than engaging in dialogue, missing opportunities to gather input or build buy-in"
• "Would benefit from adjusting communication approach based on audience needs rather than using single style across all situations"
• "Occasionally shares information on need-to-know basis when broader transparency would build trust and alignment"
• "Should focus on listening more deeply to understand underlying concerns rather than formulating responses whilst others speak"

People Development and Coaching

Exceeds Expectations:

• "Develops direct reports exceptionally well, with three team members earning promotions and two transitioning to stretch assignments during review period"
• "Provides coaching that balances support with challenge, creating development experiences that accelerate capability building without overwhelming"
• "Invests significant time in mentoring relationships, with mentees reporting 90% satisfaction with development support received"
• "Identifies individual strengths and development needs accurately, creating personalised growth plans aligned with career aspirations and organisational requirements"
• "Creates learning culture where mistakes are treated as development opportunities, increasing team willingness to take calculated risks"

Meets Expectations:

• "Conducts regular one-to-one meetings with direct reports, providing feedback and discussing development priorities"
• "Supports team members' learning by approving training requests and providing opportunities to apply new skills"
• "Offers constructive feedback when performance issues arise, addressing concerns directly and professionally"
• "Recognises individual contributions and celebrates team successes, maintaining morale and motivation"
• "Delegates appropriate responsibilities that stretch team members' capabilities whilst providing necessary support"

Needs Improvement:

• "Focuses primarily on task completion rather than developing team members' long-term capabilities and career growth"
• "Provides limited coaching or developmental feedback, missing opportunities to strengthen team performance through skill building"
• "Would benefit from dedicating more time to structured one-to-one discussions focused on growth rather than solely operational updates"
• "Sometimes retains responsibilities that could be delegated to develop team members, limiting both their growth and own capacity"
• "Should provide more specific, actionable feedback rather than general comments that don't guide improvement efforts"

Decision-Making and Judgment

Exceeds Expectations:

• "Makes sound decisions under pressure, demonstrated by crisis response that minimised customer impact whilst preserving team morale"
• "Balances data analysis with contextual judgment, avoiding both analysis paralysis and premature conclusions"
• "Involves appropriate stakeholders in decision processes, building ownership whilst maintaining decisiveness when required"
• "Learns from decision outcomes—both successful and unsuccessful—adjusting approach based on retrospective analysis"
• "Exercises appropriate judgment about escalation, resolving issues at appropriate level whilst surfacing critical matters requiring senior attention"

Meets Expectations:

• "Makes timely decisions with available information, avoiding unnecessary delays whilst gathering relevant input"
• "Considers multiple perspectives before reaching conclusions, ensuring decisions account for diverse stakeholder interests"
• "Accepts accountability for decision outcomes, whether favourable or challenging, without deflecting responsibility"
• "Explains rationale behind decisions clearly, helping team members understand reasoning and learn from process"
• "Adjusts decisions when new information emerges, demonstrating flexibility whilst maintaining overall strategic direction"

Needs Improvement:

• "Occasionally delays decisions excessively, seeking perfect information when timely action with sufficient data would be more appropriate"
• "Would benefit from involving team members more systematically in decision processes to build ownership and leverage diverse perspectives"
• "Sometimes makes decisions without fully considering downstream implications or stakeholder impacts"
• "Should provide clearer rationale when making decisions that affect team, helping members understand reasoning and building trust"
• "Could strengthen decision quality by conducting more rigorous analysis rather than relying primarily on intuition or past experience"

Change Management and Adaptability

Exceeds Expectations:

• "Leads change initiatives with exceptional skill, achieving 90% adoption rate for new processes within three months of implementation"
• "Anticipates resistance to change and proactively addresses concerns through transparent communication and stakeholder engagement"
• "Models adaptability during organisational transitions, maintaining positive attitude that influences team morale constructively"
• "Balances stability with change effectively, preserving what works whilst improving areas requiring transformation"
• "Supports team members through transitions with empathy and practical assistance, reducing change-related stress and maintaining productivity"

Meets Expectations:

• "Implements changes as directed, communicating rationale and expectations clearly to affected team members"
• "Adapts to new circumstances without excessive resistance, adjusting work approaches when situations require flexibility"
• "Supports team through changes by providing clear information, addressing concerns, and maintaining focus on objectives"
• "Manages own reactions to change professionally, avoiding negativity that could undermine implementation efforts"
• "Identifies opportunities to improve processes and proposes sensible enhancements when appropriate"

Needs Improvement:

• "Shows resistance to organisational changes, expressing skepticism that undermines team confidence and implementation success"
• "Would benefit from more proactive change leadership rather than waiting for directives before engaging with transformation efforts"
• "Sometimes focuses excessively on what's being lost during changes rather than opportunities new approaches create"
• "Could strengthen change management by developing more detailed implementation plans that address transition challenges systematically"
• "Should provide more support to team members struggling with changes rather than expecting immediate adaptation"

Team Building and Collaboration

Exceeds Expectations:

• "Builds exceptionally cohesive teams characterised by mutual trust, psychological safety, and collective accountability for results"
• "Fosters collaboration across organisational boundaries, creating partnerships that deliver outcomes neither group could achieve independently"
• "Addresses team conflicts constructively, facilitating resolution that strengthens relationships rather than leaving lingering tensions"
• "Cultivates inclusive environment where diverse perspectives are valued, evidenced by 95% team engagement scores"
• "Celebrates team successes whilst maintaining individual accountability, creating culture of shared achievement"

Meets Expectations:

• "Maintains professional team environment where members work together productively toward common objectives"
• "Encourages collaboration and knowledge sharing, creating forums for team members to exchange ideas and learnings"
• "Addresses interpersonal issues when they arise, preventing conflicts from escalating or damaging team effectiveness"
• "Recognises both individual and collective contributions, maintaining morale and motivation across the team"
• "Builds positive working relationships with peers in other departments, facilitating cross-functional cooperation"

Needs Improvement:

• "Team dynamics could be stronger, with limited collaboration and knowledge sharing among members working in silos"
• "Would benefit from investing more time in team building and relationship development beyond task-focused interactions"
• "Sometimes avoids addressing interpersonal conflicts, allowing tensions to persist rather than facilitating productive resolution"
• "Could strengthen cross-functional relationships to improve collaboration and reduce organisational friction"
• "Should create more opportunities for team bonding and informal connection that builds trust and cohesion"

Accountability and Results Delivery

Exceeds Expectations:

• "Consistently exceeds performance targets whilst maintaining quality standards, delivering 115% of objectives across all key metrics"
• "Takes ownership of commitments completely, following through on promises and keeping stakeholders informed of progress"
• "Holds self and team accountable to high standards, creating culture where excellence is expected and achieved"
• "Addresses performance issues directly and promptly, providing clear feedback and support whilst maintaining expectations"
• "Delivers results through others effectively, achieving outcomes through team development rather than personal heroics"

Meets Expectations:

• "Achieves established performance objectives consistently, meeting targets and deadlines across responsibilities"
• "Takes responsibility for outcomes without making excuses, addressing challenges constructively when they arise"
• "Maintains accountability systems that track progress and surface issues requiring attention"
• "Follows through on commitments reliably, building trust through consistent delivery"
• "Balances results focus with sustainable work practices, avoiding burnout whilst maintaining productivity"

Needs Improvement:

• "Sometimes misses deadlines or delivers incomplete work, requiring follow-up to achieve full completion of assignments"
• "Would benefit from taking greater ownership of outcomes rather than attributing challenges primarily to external factors"
• "Could strengthen results delivery by developing more rigorous planning and progress monitoring systems"
• "Should address performance issues more directly rather than hoping problems resolve without intervention"
• "Needs to balance empathy with accountability, providing support whilst maintaining clear performance expectations"

How to Use Leadership Performance Review Phrases Effectively

Customise to Individual Context

Generic phrases fail to resonate or drive improvement. Effective feedback incorporates specific examples, names actual situations, quantifies impacts where possible, references observable behaviours, and connects to established goals. Transform "Shows good leadership" into "Successfully led Q3 product launch by establishing clear roles, maintaining weekly check-ins, and resolving resource conflicts—resulting in on-time delivery and 92% stakeholder satisfaction."

Balance Strengths and Development Areas

Comprehensive reviews acknowledge both what's working and what requires attention. The ideal ratio depends on overall performance level—high performers might receive 80% strengths recognition with 20% developmental guidance; struggling performers require heavier emphasis on improvement areas whilst still acknowledging genuine strengths to maintain engagement.

Structure feedback to:

1. Begin with specific strengths and their impacts
2. Transition to development areas framed as growth opportunities
3. Conclude with overall assessment and forward focus

Make Feedback Actionable

Observation without guidance for improvement wastes the review opportunity. Effective developmental feedback identifies specific behaviours to change, suggests concrete actions to take, provides resources or support available, establishes clear success criteria, and agrees on follow-up mechanisms.

Rather than "Needs to improve communication," offer: "To strengthen stakeholder communication, schedule bi-weekly updates with key partners, prepare agenda focusing on progress and issues requiring input, and send summary notes within 24 hours. Success will be measured through stakeholder satisfaction survey scores improving from current 65% to target 80% by next review."

Document Throughout the Year

Effective performance reviews draw from accumulated observations rather than recency bias. Maintain ongoing notes about significant achievements, specific examples of behaviours (positive and developmental), feedback received from stakeholders, progress on development goals, and critical incidents requiring documentation.

This practice ensures reviews reflect full performance period, provides specific examples that strengthen feedback credibility, reduces time pressure during review writing, and supports fair, evidence-based evaluation.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Vague Language: Weak: "Good leadership skills" Strong: "Built team capability by implementing monthly skills workshops and peer mentoring program, resulting in three promotions and 30% reduction in external hiring needs"

Recency Bias: Avoid: Focusing exclusively on recent months whilst ignoring earlier performance Instead: Review full period systematically, weighting significance appropriately

Inflation or Deflation: Avoid: Rating everyone as "exceeds expectations" or being overly critical across all areas Instead: Differentiate performance honestly with specific evidence supporting ratings

Comparing to Others: Avoid: "Not as strategic as Sarah" or "Weaker presenter than John" Instead: Evaluate against role requirements and established criteria, not peer comparison

Personality Rather Than Performance: Avoid: "Introverted" or "Lacks charisma" Instead: Focus on observable behaviours and measurable outcomes, not personality traits

Leadership Performance Review Phrases for Remote Leaders

Remote and hybrid work requires adapted leadership approaches. Relevant phrases include:

Exceeds Expectations:

• "Maintains exceptional team connection despite physical distance, using varied communication channels and regular video check-ins to preserve culture"
• "Creates inclusive virtual meeting environments where remote participants engage as fully as in-office attendees"
• "Demonstrates trust-based management of distributed team, focusing on outcomes rather than activity monitoring"

Needs Improvement:

• "Should strengthen remote communication practices, as distributed team members report feeling disconnected from decisions and information"
• "Would benefit from establishing clearer expectations for hybrid work arrangements to reduce confusion about availability and collaboration norms"
• "Could improve virtual meeting facilitation to ensure remote participants contribute equally to discussions"

Frequently Asked Questions

How long should leadership performance review comments be?

Leadership performance review comments should typically range from 75-150 words per competency area, depending on significance and available examples. Provide sufficient detail to make feedback specific and actionable—vague one-sentence comments lack developmental value—whilst remaining concise enough for reviewers and employees to absorb. For overall assessment summaries, aim for 200-300 words that synthesise key themes. Critical incidents or significant achievements merit longer commentary with detailed context, actions, and impacts. The goal is substantive feedback that drives improvement, not arbitrary word counts, so write what's necessary to communicate meaningful observations.

Should I use first, second, or third person in performance reviews?

Use second person ("you") for most performance review contexts, as it creates direct, personal communication appropriate for feedback conversations. For example: "You successfully led the restructuring initiative" feels more engaging and conversational than third person alternatives. Some organisations prefer third person ("demonstrated strong leadership") for formal documentation, particularly in written records that may be reviewed by multiple parties. First person ("I observed") appears occasionally when managers provide personal observations or commitments. Check organisational conventions, but second person generally proves most effective for developmental feedback that employees will read and discuss.

How do I write performance review phrases for new leaders?

For new leaders, frame feedback around developmental trajectory rather than expecting fully formed capabilities. Acknowledge learning curve explicitly: "Demonstrates strong early progress in leadership role, successfully building relationships with team members whilst developing management skills." Focus on growth areas as natural development rather than deficiencies: "Would benefit from continued development in delegation and strategic planning—expected areas of growth for emerging leaders." Highlight specific improvements: "Communication skills have strengthened notably, as evidenced by increasingly effective team meetings and clearer email updates." Balance expectations appropriately, recognising that first-time managers require time to develop leadership capabilities whilst maintaining accountability for results and professional conduct.

What if I don't have specific examples for leadership review phrases?

Lack of specific examples suggests insufficient observation and documentation throughout the review period—a problem requiring immediate correction for future cycles. For current review, reconstruct examples by reviewing project records, email communications, meeting notes, stakeholder feedback, and team outcomes during the period. Speak with peers, direct reports, and stakeholders who observed the leader's work to gather concrete instances. If genuine examples cannot be identified, acknowledge this honestly whilst providing general observations and committing to better documentation going forward. Consider whether limited examples indicate actual leadership gaps requiring attention. Establish systematic observation practices—monthly notes, stakeholder check-ins, regular one-to-ones—to prevent this situation in future review cycles.

How do I balance positive and negative feedback in leadership reviews?

The ideal balance depends on overall performance level and developmental stage. High-performing leaders typically receive 70-80% recognition of strengths with 20-30% focused on development opportunities, maintaining engagement whilst identifying growth areas. Average performers warrant roughly equal emphasis on strengths and improvements—50/50—acknowledging what works whilst clearly identifying necessary changes. Struggling leaders require heavier emphasis on improvements—perhaps 70% developmental feedback—whilst still recognising genuine strengths to avoid demoralising entirely. Regardless of ratio, ensure all feedback is specific, evidence-based, and actionable. Frame development areas as growth opportunities rather than criticisms, connecting improvement to career aspirations and organisational needs. Balance within individual competency areas as well, noting both effective and problematic behaviours.

Should performance reviews include 360-degree feedback for leaders?

Including 360-degree feedback—input from direct reports, peers, and other stakeholders—significantly strengthens leadership performance reviews by providing perspectives managers alone cannot observe. Leaders interact differently with various constituencies; direct reports experience day-to-day management style, peers observe collaboration and influence, and stakeholders assess communication and partnership quality. This comprehensive view reveals blind spots and validates or challenges manager observations. However, 360 feedback requires careful implementation: maintain confidentiality to encourage honest input, aggregate responses to prevent identification, provide clear evaluation criteria to ensure constructive feedback, and integrate findings thoughtfully into overall assessment rather than treating as purely objective truth. When properly executed, 360 processes dramatically improve leadership evaluation quality and developmental impact.

How often should leadership skills be reviewed beyond annual reviews?

Leadership capabilities benefit from more frequent feedback than annual reviews alone provide. Conduct informal leadership check-ins quarterly, focusing on specific development goals, recent challenges or successes, stakeholder feedback received, and progress on improvement areas identified previously. These conversations need not be formal documentation exercises but should provide regular developmental input. For new or struggling leaders, monthly touchpoints may be appropriate until performance stabilises. After significant leadership challenges or achievements—major project completion, team restructuring, crisis management—provide real-time feedback whilst context remains fresh rather than waiting for scheduled reviews. Continuous feedback accelerates leadership development more effectively than infrequent formal evaluations, making coaching an ongoing practice rather than annual event.