Your Seven-Day Leadership Experiment
Where you are: Module 7 · Lesson 28 of 30 · about 27 minutes (reading 12, video 3, practice 12). This lesson turns one idea about your own reaction into a small seven-day experiment at work, with the comparison fixed before the week starts and a review without self-blame at the end.
What you'll be able to do
- Plan a small seven-day experiment about your own reaction, on a five-line card.
- Fix comparison entries before the week starts, so that day 7 compares observations with observations.
- Write in advance how you will respond if a new request or fact arrives on day 3.
- Review the week without self-blame, treating "no change" and "worse" as valid results.
What the research covers, and what it does not
Three research summaries are relevant to parts of this lesson. None of them tests the Enneagram or the card below.
- Planning ahead. Gollwitzer and Sheeran (2006) combined 94 tests of "if-then" plans, where people decide in advance what they will do when a named situation arises. They report a medium-to-large effect on reaching goals (d = .65, a measure of effect size).
- Coaching. Wang and colleagues (2021) combined 20 studies (957 people) of psychologically informed workplace coaching and report gains in goal attainment and self-efficacy (a person's belief that they can do what they set out to do). Those people had coaches; a self-paced course is not shown to do the same.
- Writing. Lukenda and colleagues (2023) reviewed 13 studies of structured writing about work stress; nine reported benefits.
The seven-day card, the comparison entries and the day-7 review are this course's design. No source shows that they change how a manager acts.
The seven-day card (our design)
The card has five lines. You write all five before day 1.
- The small step. One thing you will do or check about your own reaction, inside your own role. It needs nobody's approval and it is not about changing a colleague. Example: "When someone disagrees with me in a meeting, I count to five and ask one question before I answer."
- The start-of-week comparison entry. Written on day 1, before anything happens. It holds the last comparable event (what you did, your reaction, what happened next) and two or three signs you will record this week. Signs are things you can count or see, such as "minutes I spend on the work myself".
- When I write. Choose your moments in advance. Six short entries of about five minutes each is the course's planning figure: the start-of-week entry, the day-3 note, a check-in note, an own-reaction note, an outcome note and the day-7 review.
- The if-then rule for a new fact. "If a request or fact arrives that threatens work I handed over, then the same day I tell the owner, ask what they need, keep the check-in, and step in only on the part that needs me." This is the rule from Lesson 22.
- The stop or review rule. When you stop early, for example "if safety or a promise to a customer is at risk", or when you will look sooner than day 7.
Day 3 is not known in advance. You choose the rule now (line 4) and apply it when the fact comes.
Privacy. The card holds no names and no confidential facts. Write "my team member", "my manager", "the request". If you want to tell a trusted person how it went, that is your own choice. The platform cannot see your record and cannot tell whether you did the week.
The day-7 review
After the week, at work:
- Re-read the start-of-week entry and the week's notes.
- Write what you can see: counts, times, what was said. Keep stories out.
- Name the result: better, no change, worse or cannot tell. All four are valid.
- Decide about your idea of what you were protecting: keep, narrow or drop, with a reason from your entries. If fewer than two comparable events happened and nothing contradicted the idea, write "cannot tell" and leave the idea as it was.
- Write one line of review without blame, and one question to carry forward.
A review without blame keeps the facts and drops the verdict. "I spent about ten minutes on it on Tuesday, and stopped" is a fact you can compare with next week. "I failed again" is a verdict, and it cannot be compared with anything.
After the week, Lesson 29 asks you to write a private thirty-day plan to continue.
Worked example
Tahani supervises a billing team. On Sunday she hands Jana the monthly invoice check: 200 invoices, errors listed, sent to Finance by next Sunday at 11:00 (the real deadline). Jana decides the order of the work; only Tahani approves a credit note. Check-in: Wednesday at 14:00. Last month Tahani took a similar check back on the Tuesday with no new fact, and spent about four hours on it.
| Line | Tahani's card |
|---|---|
| 1. Small step | "Before I send my team member a message about the check, I decide whether it is a question or an instruction. Where I can, I send a question." |
| 2. Comparison entry (Monday) | "Last month I took the check back on Tuesday with no new fact: about four hours. Body: tight shoulders. Feeling: uneasy. Thought: 'it will be late.' First reaction: I opened the file. One event, not a habit. Signs: (a) minutes I spend on the check myself; (b) questions or instructions in my messages; (c) whether I note the pull when I feel it." |
| 3. When I write | "Monday: this entry. Wednesday: the day-3 note and the check-in note. Thursday: the own-reaction note. Sunday: the outcome note and the review." |
| 4. If-then | "If a fact threatens the check, the same day I tell my team member, ask what they need, keep the check-in, and step in only on what needs me, such as a credit note." |
| 5. Stop rule | "If a customer payment is at risk, I step in at once and write why. Otherwise I review on day 7." |
Day 3. At 10:00 on Wednesday Finance moves its cut-off to Sunday at 09:00. Jana does not know. Tahani tells her at 10:30, asks what she needs, and keeps the 14:00 check-in. The check stays with Jana.
Day 7. Tahani spent about ten minutes on the check herself, on Tuesday, then stopped; last month it was about four hours. Both messages were questions. Result: better on the first sign. She narrows her idea ("I may take work back to protect the deadline") to "when I cannot see progress". Review: "I spent about ten minutes on it on Tuesday, and I noticed it." Question: "What would show me progress without opening the file?"
If nothing had changed (four hours again), the result is "no change", which is valid, and the review keeps the facts. Either way, the week says nothing about what she is like, and it does not prove her idea.
Watch: Seven days, then continue
As you watch, notice:
- the five lines of Amira's card, and what she writes on Monday before anything happens;
- what she does on day 3, when a delivery moves a day earlier;
- how her day-7 review states counts, and why "no change" would be just as valid.
The lesson teaches the same points in text, so it is complete without the video.
Your turn
Work privately in your coaching record. Use no names in the card: write "my team member".
The case. Maha is a first-time supervisor. On Sunday she handed Hana the duty roster for the following week. It must be shown to the team by next Sunday at 08:00 (the real deadline). Hana decides who works which shift and may swap shifts; she may not approve leave, which Maha's manager approves. Check-in: Thursday at 10:00. Last month, Maha took the roster back on the Tuesday with no new fact. Her note then: body, tight shoulders; feeling, uneasy; thought, "if I do not do it, it will be late"; first reaction, she opened the file. Monday is day 1, Wednesday is day 3, next Sunday is day 7. The team works Sunday to Thursday.
Part A. The card. Write Maha's five lines for the experiment of not taking the roster back without a reason.
Part B. Day 3. On Wednesday at 14:00 Maha's manager asks for an overtime summary by Thursday at 14:00. Only Hana can pull it, it takes about two hours, and it cannot be pulled before Thursday. Maha does not know how much of the roster is done. Write her response: is there a reason to act, what she does and when, what she asks, and what she does not do. Add one private line on her own pull.
Part C. Day 7. Her notes: Monday, she opened the roster file for about two minutes and changed nothing. Wednesday 14:15, she asked her team member about the summary and heard the roster was about two-thirds done. Wednesday 16:00, she opened the file again for a minute and closed it. Thursday, the summary was sent by 12:40. The roster was shown on Sunday at 07:40. She took nothing back. Write her day-7 review.
Check your work
Part A, one good answer. (1) "When I feel the pull to take the roster back, I ask what new fact I have learned since Sunday. If none, I do not open the file." (2) "Last month I took the roster back on Tuesday with no new fact. Body: tight shoulders. Feeling: uneasy. Thought: 'if I do not do it, it will be late.' First reaction: I opened the file. One event, not a habit. Signs: (a) times I open the roster file; (b) hours between a new fact and my first contact with my team member; (c) whether the check-in is held and who made the shift choices." (3) Six moments on working days: Monday, Wednesday, Thursday (two), Sunday (two). (4) The if-then rule; leave goes to my manager. (5) "If a shift would go uncovered and nobody else can cover it, I step in and write why."
Part B, one good answer. Yes, a reason for contact: the request takes two hours of Hana's Thursday, the check-in day. It does not yet show that she cannot finish the roster. Maha tells Hana on Wednesday, as a question: "My manager has asked for the overtime summary by Thursday at 14:00. Only you can pull it. What does that do to the roster, and what do you need from me?" She keeps the Thursday check-in. Only if both cannot fit does she ask her manager whether the summary can move; her manager decides. She does not take the roster back, does not promise 14:00 before Hana answers, and does not wait in silence. Pull: "I may be protecting how my manager sees me." Taking it back with no new reason would look like opening the file on Wednesday evening before asking anything.
Part C, one good answer. "I opened the file twice (about two minutes, then one) and changed nothing. I made contact 15 minutes after the new fact. The roster was shown at 07:40 on Sunday; I took nothing back. Result: better. Idea: keep it as a question; two events cannot show next week. Review: 'I opened the file twice and closed it both times.' Question: what could I ask on Monday so that I do not need to open the file?"
Criteria. The card is about Maha's own reaction, with a small step inside her role and no names. The signs are fixed before the week and do not predict the result. Day 3 gets a same-day question, the check-in is kept and the roster stays with Hana. The review has counts, a named result, keep, narrow or drop with a reason, and no verdict on herself.
Not yet: "I will not open the file once" (a prediction); "No contact until Thursday"; "Take the roster back so Hana is free"; "Hana said nothing, so it is fine"; "I failed again".
Record Checkpoint 7 (private). Write your own seven-day card, real or fictional, with the five lines, and add the question you asked in Lesson 27 with the answer in their words, or "not yet asked". Run the week at work. The day-7 review goes in fields 9 and 10 of your record.
Extra practice (optional)
Ibrahim plans to give Layan feedback on Wednesday, day 3, from 11:30 to 11:50. At 09:00 that day his manager asks him to cover the front desk from 11:00 to 13:00. The rest of Wednesday is full; on Thursday he is free 09:00 to 10:00 and 14:00 to 15:00. Whether Layan is free is not known. What does he do?
Key. The feedback falls inside the cover, so he moves it, not cancels it: today he offers Layan Thursday at 09:00 or 14:00 and asks which suits her. He does not give it at the front desk and does not drop it. If no time works by day 7, "no comparable event this week" is a valid entry, and the review says "cannot tell".
Knowledge check
What is the start-of-week comparison entry for?
A day-7 review reads: 'No change. I opened the call list three times and took it over on Monday. I always do this.' Which rewrite keeps the facts and drops the blame?
On day 3 a manager learns the deadline for handed-over work has moved a day earlier. The owner does not know. What does the if-then rule say?
Answers explained
- D is right: the entry holds a past event and signs you can see, fixed before the week. A asks it to predict; B asks it to prove; C confuses the start with the end.
- A is right: it keeps the count and the day, drops "always", and ends with a question. B is a verdict on the self. C changes the count. D drops a valid result.
- C is right: a moved deadline is a material new fact, so the rule gives same-day contact as a question. A waits in silence. B is the largest response with no reason shown. D is not hers to decide alone.
Key takeaways
- A seven-day card has five lines: a small step about your own reaction, a comparison entry, when you write, an if-then rule and a stop rule.
- Fix the signs before the week, so day 7 compares what you saw with what you saw.
- You cannot plan the day-3 request, but you can plan the rule you will apply to it.
- "No change", "worse" and "cannot tell" are valid results. A review without blame keeps the facts.
- The research covers parts (if-then plans, coaching, writing); the card itself is this course's design and is untested.
Sources
- Gollwitzer, P. M. and Sheeran, P. (2006) "Implementation intentions and goal achievement: a meta-analysis of effects and processes." Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1 (abstract only; full text not read).
- Wang and colleagues (2021) "The effectiveness of workplace coaching: a meta-analysis of contemporary psychologically informed coaching approaches." Journal of Work-Applied Management 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/jwam-04-2021-0030 (abstract only; full text not read).
- Lukenda and colleagues (2023) "Expressive writing as a practice against work stress: a literature review." Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health 39(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2023.2240512 (abstract only; full text not read).
- This course's own design: the seven-day card, the comparison entry, the six writing moments, the day-7 review and the record checkpoint. The cases of Amira, Tahani, Jana, Maha, Hana, Ibrahim and Layan are fictional. The research above concerns components and says nothing about this card or about the Enneagram.