“Be More Strategic” is Not a Behavioral Expectation

I was facilitating a Talent Planning session with an Executive Leadership Team. At one point, one of the executives said, “We need our leaders to be more strategic.”

Heads nodded around the table. Everyone agreed.

I asked them what “be more strategic” actually means.

After a moment of silence, one leader said it meant spending more time on long-term planning. Another said it meant getting out of the weeds and stepping back from operational work.

Then I asked, “What level of leader is expected to do those things—focus on long-term planning and step away from more operational work?”

I could see some uncertain looks. Finally, someone said, “Well . . . all leaders.”

“All leaders at all levels?” I asked. “So, a Senior Manager should pull back from tactical work and spend their time on long-term planning?”

That’s when the room got a little uncomfortable.

It became clear that not everyone had the same definition of what “be more strategic” meant—or what it should look like at different levels in the organization.

We spent the next 90 minutes wrestling with those questions.

The phrase be more strategic sounded clear. But in practice, it meant something different to everyone in the room—and something different depending on the level of the leader.

It is not just the “what” but also the “how”

Recently I wrote about the importance of having a leadership definition, a clear point of view that answers the question: What does it mean to be a leader here?

But a definition alone is not enough.

Organizations need to answer a second companion question: What does that actually look like in practice?

If a definition makes plain who leaders are expected to be, behavioral standards clarify what leadership behavior looks like day to day.

The distinction matters, because behavioral clarity makes a leadership definition tangible and observable.

Behavioral clarity enables development

Clear behavioral standards make leadership development more effective. When expectations are vague, development conversations tend to sound like this:

“Be more strategic.”
“Communicate better.”
“Develop your team.”

The advice is well intentioned, but it is not actionable. If someone doesn’t already know how to be more strategic, the direction to “be more strategic” isn’t going to help them.

What clear behavioral expectations sound like

To counter those vague directives, the goal is to show what clear behavioral expectations actually sound like. They should describe specific, observable actions rather than abstract improvement.

Instead of “Be more strategic,” a behavioral expectation might sound like:

“Before launching new work, connect the initiative to the organization’s strategic priorities and explain how the work supports those priorities.”

This makes strategic thinking observable: leaders must link work to strategy and articulate the connection.

Instead of “Communicate better,” a behavioral expectation might sound like:

“Provide the context behind decisions so your teams understand the reasoning, tradeoffs, and expected outcomes.”

Now communication isn’t about style; it’s about sharing context and clarifying decisions.

Instead of “Develop your team,” a behavioral expectation might sound like:

“Intentionally delegate work that stretches employees’ capabilities and provide coaching as they work through it.”

This shifts development from a vague aspiration to a specific leadership practice.

Definition + behavioral standards

A leadership definition shows the identity of leadership. Behavioral standards make that identity visible.

Without definition, leaders lack direction. Without behavioral clarity, leaders lack a shared understanding of how to act.

When both are present, leadership stops being abstract. It becomes something people can see, practice, and refine in the real situations leaders face every day.

Ask yourself, does your organization have a concrete leadership definition and behavioral standards? And do your leaders know what those behaviors look like in practice?