Practice empathetic responses so your help doesn’t sound dismissive, using a structured worksheet grounded in evidence-based communication skills.
Think of a recent conversation where you felt the connection was missing — where the other person didn't seem to feel understood. What were you focused on in that moment, and what might they have needed instead?
Your client received feedback in their 360 that team members find them hard to approach with problems and that they do not feel heard in one-on-ones. Your client is surprised - they believe they are supportive and open. They are skeptical the feedback is accurate but willing to examine it. The gap between their self-perception and the data is significant.
Frame this as applying the perspective-taking exercise to a specific team relationship, not as accepting the 360 feedback as definitive. 'Rather than debating whether the feedback is accurate, let's take one relationship and actually look at it through the other person's lens. That will tell us more than either defending against the feedback or accepting it.' Have your client pick the team member with whom they suspect the gap is widest.
Watch how quickly your client fills in the 'Their Experience' section versus the 'Their Needs' section. Leaders who are high in analytical empathy (understanding others' logic) but lower in relational empathy (understanding others' emotional experience) tend to accurately describe what the other person thinks but not what they feel. A 'Their Experience' section that reads like a task summary rather than a felt experience is diagnostic.
Start by asking your client to read back what they wrote in 'Their Experience.' Then ask: 'What would that person need to feel from a conversation with you for them to feel genuinely heard?' The gap between what your client can describe and what they can imagine providing is where the coaching work lives. The useful question: 'In your last one-on-one with this person, at what moment did they most need you to slow down - and did you?'
If your client's perspective-taking stays consistently at a cognitive level - they can describe what the other person might think but consistently cannot describe what they might feel - and if this pattern is broad rather than limited to one relationship, this may be a limitation in emotional attunement that warrants more exploration than one worksheet exercise. Severity: low. Response: continue the work, but hold open the question of whether this is a skill to develop or a more fundamental attunement pattern.
Your client is described by their team as caring and supportive but also as 'always trying to fix things.' Team members have stopped bringing messy or emotionally complex problems because they know the conversation will pivot to solutions before they feel heard. Your client is genuinely empathetic but is not comfortable with emotional expression that has no clear resolution path.
Frame this as a pacing issue, not an empathy deficit. 'The empathy is there - the worksheet is going to help you understand what happens in the transition from hearing to solving, and what the other person needs in that window before you move.' This distinction matters because clients who see themselves as helpers often experience 'you move to solutions too fast' as 'you don't care,' and they do care. The worksheet is about the behavioral sequence, not the underlying motivation.
Watch whether the 'What I Could Do Differently' section defaults to new actions rather than different timing. 'Ask more questions before suggesting' is a timing intervention. 'Listen better' is too vague. If your client's plan is full of things to add rather than things to pause, they may not have fully understood that the core change is about sequencing, not content.
Ask your client to describe their last conversation with the specific person they chose for this exercise. Walk through the sequence: when did they shift from listening to problem-solving? What triggered the shift? Was the other person still mid-expression when the solution energy came in? The question that opens this up: 'What would you have needed to believe about the situation to stay in the listening mode five minutes longer?'
If your client's move-to-solutions pattern is extreme enough that team members have stopped bringing them problems entirely - and if this is confirmed by engagement data or direct feedback - the impact on your client's ability to lead may be more significant than the behavioral pattern suggests. Severity: low. Response: continue the exercise, but explore whether there are other signals of relational distance on the team that should be addressed alongside this specific pattern.
Your client made a decision that publicly contradicted a commitment they had made to a senior team member - reassigning a project the team member had been developing for six months without adequate notice or explanation. The team member was visibly hurt in the team meeting. Your client has apologized but the relationship remains cold. They want to repair it but are not sure how.
Frame the worksheet as building a specific understanding of what the other person experienced and needs before attempting another repair conversation. 'An apology that doesn't demonstrate understanding of what was lost often makes things worse. We're building the understanding first.' This framing gives the client a reason to do the perspective-taking work with genuine care rather than as a prelude to getting back to normal.
Watch whether the 'Their Experience' section focuses on the immediate event (the meeting, the announcement) or goes deeper to what was at stake for the other person (months of investment, professional identity connected to the project, trust in your client specifically). Surface-level perspective-taking produces surface-level repair. Also watch whether the 'What I Could Do Differently' section addresses the structural issue (how decisions are communicated) or only the interpersonal one.
Start by asking your client to read back what they wrote in 'Their Experience.' Ask: 'Is this what you would say to this person in the repair conversation?' If the answer is yes, the exercise is ready to translate into action. If the answer is 'I wouldn't say it that directly,' explore what the client is protecting - their own comfort or the relationship. The question that opens the repair: 'What does this person need to hear from you that is more specific than an apology?'
If the relationship damage is deep enough that the team member is disengaged, withdrawn, or actively looking for other opportunities, the repair window may have narrowed considerably. Severity: moderate. Response: the worksheet still serves the client's growth, but the conversation about whether repair is possible at this stage - and what the client's role is regardless of the outcome - may be more important than the repair strategy itself.
A client who's been avoiding a conversation they know they need to have
ADHDA client struggles to name emotions beyond basic labels like 'stressed' or 'fine'
ADHDA client's anger expression is damaging relationships at work or at home
Step 3 of 6 in A client has been thinking about a career change for months but hasn't committed to a direction
Next: 28-Day Dopamine Reset Challenge → Explore all pathways →
