For teams & companies
Leadership development that scales — and that you can measure
Consistent, objective coaching on how your managers actually lead meetings — with team-level insight and the data-control options your security and legal teams need.
The problem
Leadership development is expensive, doesn’t scale, and is hard to measure. 1:1 coaching reaches only execs; quality is inconsistent across managers. And internal meeting content is sensitive — you can’t just pipe it to a third-party AI.
How Myc helps
Give every manager objective coaching on the behaviors that make meetings work — framing, closing decisions, assigning clearly, including quieter voices. Each person is scored against what their role called for, team leads see the people they manage, and you get development you can actually report on.
What matters for you
- The 11-behavior taxonomy applied consistently across every manager
- Role-conditioned scoring — chair, presenter, or participant
- Organizations + teams with role-based access; team-lead views
- Measurable development you can report on over time
- Pre-LLM PII redaction, bring-your-own LLM endpoint, or turnkey self-hosting
“We can’t send internal transcripts to a third-party AI”
Answered head-on: no bot in your calls; PII redaction before any AI call; bring your own LLM endpoint (your provider contract, not ours); or turnkey self-hosting where data never leaves your infrastructure. Security and legal docs — including a DPA — are ready for your review.
How a low-risk pilot works
- 1
Invite a small cohort
Start with a handful of managers — no org-wide rollout required.
- 2
Each person uploads selected transcripts
They choose which of their own meetings to analyze. No bot joins anything.
- 3
Everyone gets private coaching
Each manager receives their own report — strengths, focus area, and one experiment.
- 4
The org sees only agreed, aggregate insight
Consent-gated, aggregate development themes — never any individual’s report.
What managers and HR can — and cannot — see
The organization can see
- Aggregate, consent-gated development themes across the cohort
- That a participant completed an analysis (not its contents)
- Program-level progress over time, in aggregate
The organization cannot see
- Any individual’s analysis, scores, or transcript
- Specific quotes or moments from anyone’s meeting
- Anything a participant hasn’t agreed to share
This is coaching, not monitoring. Individual reports belong to the individual.
Eleven leadership behaviors, across two axes.
Every analysis scores your meeting against a structured taxonomy — task effectiveness and relational effectiveness — and only scores a behavior when the transcript gives enough evidence to judge it fairly.
See the full frameworkScored against what your role actually called for — chairing a decision, presenting, or contributing — because the same words mean different things depending on the seat you were in.
Real output
The same rigorous lens on every manager, every meeting — so “leadership development” becomes something you can point to on a chart, not just a line item in a budget.
Real coaching from Myc analyses, shown verbatim. Participant names are fictional test personas.
Summary
You led this retro like an operator, not just a facilitator. What stood out was your ability to take scattered launch lessons, make the impact legible, and turn them into repeatable team practices. The biggest improvement now is a small but important one: when you assign the follow-through, name the timing as explicitly as you name the owner and deliverable. You are already creating strong alignment in the room; adding firmer time bounds will make the execution after the meeting match the quality of the discussion inside it.
What You Did Well
You turn recognition into operating standards
Your strongest signature in this meeting was that you did not stop at praise. With Elliot, Mara and Wren, Felix, and Jay, you named the specific behavior, explained the business impact, and then converted it into a team standard or template. That is senior-leader communication: you used a retro not just to appreciate people, but to codify what the team should repeat.
What You Did Well
“Alright. Let me zoom out. Four things I want this team to take from the Compass launch. One — Elliot's same-day post-mortem becomes our P1 standard. Template coming from Elliot. Two — designer-on-support rotation for the first 48 hours of major launches. Playbook coming from Mara and Wren. Three — Felix's two-sentence headline format becomes our standard for all project status comms. Guide coming from Felix. Four — all stakeholder-facing metrics include benchmark, trend, and interpretation. Jay's updating the report template. Questions on any of this?”
Key Coaching Themes
The main thing to tighten is time-bounding your asks before they leave the room
You were consistently clear about owner and deliverable, but several requests stayed soft on timing. You asked Elliot to document the incident template, Felix to write a short guide, and Mara and Wren to produce a playbook, but only Jay got a concrete time expectation in the moment. In a meeting this execution-oriented, the missing piece is usually not clarity of intent but locking the finish line while everyone is still aligned.
What worked and what was missing
Because you run a crisp meeting, people will often leave feeling clear even when the deadline is still implied. The risk is not confusion in the room; it is drift afterward when each person translates 'before the next release' or 'share it with the team' into a different timeline. Your highest-leverage refinement is to close the loop with one more sentence that names when you want the first draft or handoff.
For example, in this meeting you said
“That's a great call. Mara and Wren, can you two co-author a one-page launch support playbook that covers the designer rotation, the pre-launch briefing, and the escalation criteria? I'd like to have it ready before the next major release.”
Next time, try something like
“Mara and Wren, can you co-author the one-page playbook and get me a draft by next Wednesday? I'd like enough time to review it before we get close to the next major release.”