A leader can intend to encourage debate while being experienced as dismissive. The gap may remain invisible because employees adapt around the behavior and stop raising difficult issues.
Self-awareness improves when personal reflection is combined with specific feedback and evidence of impact.
Use the blind-spot idea carefully
The Johari window distinguishes what is known or unknown to oneself and to others. It can be a useful conversation aid for examining awareness and disclosure.
It is not a diagnostic instrument that establishes a person’s character or the cause of a conflict.
The practical question is what others observe that the leader has not recognized. Focus on behavior and consequences rather than speculative descriptions of an inner personality.
Ask for concrete examples
Request feedback about a defined situation: decision meetings, delegation, escalation or responses to bad news.
Ask what you did, how it affected the work and what different behavior would help. Broad questions such as “Am I a good leader?” often produce vague or reassuring answers.
A hypothetical operations leader might ask when their involvement clarifies a decision and when it causes teams to wait unnecessarily.
Seek contrasting perspectives and examples that do not fit the initial pattern.
Make honesty safer
A power difference affects feedback. Employees may reasonably fear career consequences even when a leader says criticism is welcome.
Use an appropriate process, explain how information will be handled and avoid pressing for disclosures that could identify contributors unnecessarily.
Where anonymity is promised, ensure the method can actually provide it. Small groups and detailed comments can make identification possible.
The leader’s response matters most. Arguing with every example teaches people that feedback is costly.
Separate reflection from diagnosis
Personality assessments vary in evidence, intended use and quality. The number of categories or the richness of a description does not establish validity.
Use appropriate expertise when assessment is genuinely needed. Explain purpose, consent or other applicable basis, access and limits.
Do not treat a color, type or score as an explanation of misconduct or as a permanent boundary on capability.
Workplace feedback should not become amateur clinical diagnosis or an inquiry into private life.
Convert insight into observable practice
Choose one behavior to change. Define what a colleague would see differently and in which situations.
For example, the leader could invite contrary evidence before giving a preferred view, summarize the concern and explain the decision afterward.
Practice in real work and obtain follow-up feedback. Awareness without changed behavior has limited operating effect.
Preserve accountability: understanding a personal trigger does not excuse repeated harmful conduct.
Check whether the effect improved
Look for changes in decision quality, early escalation or the ability of others to contribute. Do not rely only on the leader’s sense of progress.
A decline in disagreement may indicate better coordination or greater silence. Ask what changed and examine actual cases.
Use coaching or other professional support where appropriate, with clear boundaries around organizational reporting and confidentiality.
Self-awareness is an ongoing discipline of comparing intention, behavior and impact. Its value lies in giving leaders more choice over how they act and creating better conditions for others to perform.