Pre-1:1 Competency Diagnosis Card for Coaching Managers
A one-page prep template that forces managers to name the exact competency, the evidence, and the rep's development stage before every coaching 1:1. Stops surface-behaviour coaching and replaces it with a precise diagnosis before the conversation starts.
How to use it
Complete this card in the ten minutes before you sit down with a rep. Use the failure-mode reference table to translate what you observed into a named competency, then select the development stage and the matching intervention. Bring the completed card into the session as your coaching agenda.
What's inside
- Four-field diagnosis template covering competency, evidence, development stage, and coaching intervention
- Failure-mode reference table mapping 12 common surface behaviours to their underlying competency
- Three worked examples showing a behaviour note alongside a completed competency diagnosis
- Development stage definitions: Conceptual, Under Pressure, and Inconsistent, with observable markers for each
- Coaching intervention guide matched to each development stage
- "What bad prep looks like" section naming the four most common manager errors before a 1:1
- When NOT to use this card, with two specific scenarios
Why This Exists
Most 1:1 coaching fails at step zero. The manager walks in knowing a rep "talks too much" or "isn't closing hard enough" but hasn't answered the only question that determines whether the session will change behaviour:
Which specific competency failed, and at what stage of development is this rep on it?
Without that answer, you're reacting to symptoms. This card forces the diagnosis before you open your mouth.
When NOT to Use This Card
- Performance management conversations. If you are addressing a conduct or threshold issue, this is not the right tool. That conversation has a different structure and a different owner.
- Informal corridor feedback. If you caught something in the moment and want to give a quick observation, do it. This card is for planned development sessions, not every offhand comment.
The Four-Field Diagnosis Template
Complete every field before the session. If you cannot complete Field 1 with a named competency, you are not ready to coach yet.
REP NAME: DATE: SESSION LENGTH:
Field 1: Named Competency
Write the specific competency you are coaching. Use the failure-mode reference table below to identify it. A competency is a named, coachable skill, not a description of what happened.
Competency being coached: _______________________________________________
Field 2: Evidence
List the specific, observable evidence that identified this competency. Calls, deal reviews, pipeline data, live observation. Minimum one concrete data point. "I have a feeling" is not evidence.
| Evidence Type | What You Observed | Source/Date |
|---|---|---|
Field 3: Development Stage
Select one. See definitions below.
- Conceptual: The rep does not yet understand the skill, why it matters, or what it looks like in practice.
- Under Pressure: The rep understands the skill and can demonstrate it in low-stakes situations, but it breaks down when the conversation gets difficult.
- Inconsistent, The rep has demonstrated the skill well on multiple occasions but does not apply it reliably. Execution depends on the day, the account, or the deal size.
Field 4: Coaching Intervention
Select the approach implied by the stage above.
| Stage | What the Rep Needs | Your Intervention |
|---|---|---|
| Conceptual | The model, the rationale, and a demonstration | Teach first. Show a worked example. Explain the why. Role-play with you as the buyer. |
| Under Pressure | Repetition in hard conditions | Scenario practice on the exact pressure points where it breaks. Debrief on recent live examples. |
| Inconsistent | A trigger and an accountability mechanism | Identify the conditions where it drops off. Agree a specific check-in metric or call-review cadence. |
My chosen intervention for this session: _______________________________________________
Failure-Mode Reference Table
Use this to translate what you observed into a named competency. Find the surface behaviour in the left column, then confirm with the underlying competency in the right column before completing Field 1.
| What You Observed (Surface Behaviour) | Underlying Competency |
|---|---|
| Rep talks for more than 60% of the call | Active listening / question discipline |
| Rep jumps to a demo or solution on the first buying signal | Qualification rigour / opportunity diagnosis |
| Rep accepts single-contact access and treats it as a win | Stakeholder mapping / multi-threading |
| Rep cannot articulate why the prospect should buy now | Business case construction |
| Rep discounts immediately when price is challenged | Value-based objection handling |
| Rep gives vague next steps at the end of every call | Meeting and commitment management |
| Rep loses momentum after a positive first call | Pipeline progression discipline |
| Rep cannot name the prospect's decision process | Discovery depth |
| Rep's forecast is consistently wrong by more than 20% | Deal qualification and forecast integrity |
| Rep avoids calling senior stakeholders | Executive engagement confidence |
| Rep sends long email chains instead of picking up the phone | Communication medium judgement |
| Rep consistently opens with features before understanding need | Needs-led selling / opening structure |
Three Worked Examples
These show the difference between a behaviour note and a completed competency diagnosis.
Example 1: "Talks Too Much"
Behaviour note (what bad prep looks like): "Jamie talks way too much on discovery calls. Needs to listen more."
Completed diagnosis:
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Named Competency | Active listening and question discipline |
| Evidence | Reviewed 3 recorded discovery calls from w/c 12 May. Jamie spoke for 68%, 71%, and 64% of call time. Prospect contributed fewer than 4 unprompted statements per call on average. |
| Development Stage | Under Pressure, in our last role-play session Jamie held back well. On live calls with senior buyers it collapses. |
| Coaching Intervention | Scenario practice with a demanding, interruptive buyer. Debrief on the three specific moments in the 12 May call where Jamie filled silence unnecessarily. Agree a personal target: prospect speaks first after every question Jamie asks. |
Example 2: "Jumps to Demo on a Buying Signal"
Behaviour note (what bad prep looks like): "Sam gets excited and rushes. Shows the product too early."
Completed diagnosis:
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Named Competency | Qualification rigour and opportunity diagnosis |
| Evidence | Deal review 9 May: Sam booked a demo after the prospect said "we've been looking at solutions like this." No MEDDIC fields confirmed. No pain quantified. Demo was rescheduled twice and deal is now stalled at 30-day mark. |
| Development Stage | Conceptual: Sam has not yet internalised the principle that a buying signal is an invitation to qualify harder, not a green light to present. |
| Coaching Intervention | Teach the model first. Walk through what a qualified opportunity looks like versus an interested contact. Use the 9 May deal as the case study. Role-play: Sam hears the same buying signal and practices three qualification questions before mentioning the product. |
Example 3: "Accepts Single-Contact Access"
Behaviour note (what bad prep looks like): "Priya only speaks to one person at each account. Needs to go wider."
Completed diagnosis:
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Named Competency | Stakeholder mapping and multi-threading |
| Evidence | Reviewed Priya's top 5 open opportunities. All 5 have one named contact. In 3 of those deals, the contact has missed two or more calls in the last 30 days. No secondary contact identified in any deal. Pipeline at risk: approximately £180,000. |
| Development Stage | Inconsistent: Priya has successfully multi-threaded in two past deals (closed Q1, closed Q4 last year). The skill exists. It is not being applied to this current pipeline. |
| Coaching Intervention | Identify the condition where it drops off (large, complex accounts with a confident gatekeeper). Agree a specific rule: every deal above £20,000 gets a stakeholder map completed before the second call. Review in next 1:1 in two weeks. |
What Bad Prep Looks Like
Four failure modes to recognise in your own prep:
- The behaviour label. You name what the rep did, not what competency it represents. "Talks too much" is not a coaching target.
- The vibe check. You have a general sense something is off but no specific evidence. Coaching from a vibe produces vague feedback that the rep cannot act on.
- The wrong stage assumption. You assume Conceptual when the real problem is Inconsistent, so you teach someone who already knows the model and they disengage. Or you assume Inconsistent when the rep genuinely does not understand the skill, so you chase accountability instead of building the foundation.
- The catch-all session. You arrive with three competencies to cover in forty-five minutes. Pick one. One competency, one session, one clear next action.
Quick Reference: Is Your Card Complete?
- Field 1 contains a named competency, not a description of behaviour
- Field 2 has at least one specific, dated observation
- Field 3 has a single stage selected with a reason
- Field 4 has a concrete intervention, not a topic area
- You have chosen one competency for this session only
If any box is unchecked, finish the prep before the session starts.
The thinking behind this
The One Question That Separates a Coaching 1:1 From a Performance Conversation is the argument this resource puts to work.