Leader User Manual
Make your management style explicit before teammates must infer it.
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~days to results
- Steps
- 6
- Confidence
- 99%
The Leader User Manual is a written guide to how a manager thinks, communicates, decides, and expects to work with others. Instead of forcing teammates to infer a new boss’s preferences over months or years, the leader documents their management beliefs, values, expectations, and relevant personal tendencies. Trusted people then review the draft for authenticity, correcting claims that do not match observed behavior. The finished guide is shared broadly and treated as an accountability contract rather than a personality manifesto. Its value comes from shortening the interpretation period: employees gain a roadmap for interacting with the leader, while the writing and review process forces the leader to clarify standards and confront inconsistencies in their self-image.
Origin
When Tim Hockey arrived at TD Ameritrade after decades at TD Bank, he wrote a “User's Manual to Tim” so his new leadership team could understand him quickly.
Core principles
- 01People should not need months to decode a new leader.
- 02Written expectations create a shared reference point.
- 03Personal review exposes gaps between stated and actual behavior.
- 04A leader must invite others to hold them accountable.
How to run it
- 1
List recurring questions
Write down what a new teammate would want to know about your values, style, decisions, availability, and expectations.
Pro tip Include behaviors that colleagues often misinterpret.
Watch out Do not turn the document into a biography.
- 2
Draft candid answers
Explain how you believe you operate, what good work looks like, and how people should raise concerns.
Pro tip Use concrete behaviors rather than abstract virtues.
Watch out Avoid presenting preferences as universal truths.
- 3
Seek harsh review
Ask people who know you well to identify statements that are inaccurate, incomplete, or self-serving.
Pro tip Choose reviewers who are comfortable disagreeing with you.
Watch out Friendly approval alone will not test authenticity.
- 4
Revise for accuracy
Change the guide until it reflects observable behavior and realistic commitments.
Pro tip Convert aspirational claims into explicit goals if they are not yet consistently true.
Watch out Do not promise responsiveness or openness you cannot sustain.
- 5
Share and discuss
Distribute the manual to the team and invite questions about how to apply it.
Pro tip Discuss it live instead of relying only on email distribution.
Watch out A document without conversation can create fresh ambiguity.
- 6
Accept accountability
Encourage teammates to point back to the guide when your behavior conflicts with it, then update either the behavior or document.
Pro tip Review the manual after major role or team changes.
Watch out Punishing someone for citing the guide destroys its credibility.
In the wild
A new division president explains in writing how decisions are escalated, when dissent is expected, what information should accompany proposals, and how feedback is delivered. Long-serving managers review the guide together during the first leadership meeting.
→ The team adapts faster and spends less time guessing about the new president’s preferences.
A founder documents a tendency to brainstorm without intending every idea as an instruction. Reviewers add that distinction to the manual and create a phrase the founder will use when making an actual decision.
→ Managers stop treating every spontaneous suggestion as a mandatory priority.
Common mistakes
Writing polished fiction
A flattering description that colleagues do not recognize creates distrust. The guide must distinguish current behavior from aspiration.
Making it one-directional
The manual should help teammates work with the leader, not merely list demands imposed on everyone else.
Refusing accountability
The guide has little value if people cannot safely identify a contradiction between its promises and the leader’s actions.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for incoming executives, newly promoted managers, and leaders forming a new team.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal for leaders unwilling to accept feedback or change behavior when their written claims prove inaccurate.
From the transcript
“And I actually spent some time on a very rainy weekend at my place in South Carolina and pen something I called it was the…”
“here's what I what I think about management, Here's what I believe, here's you know, everything you would want to know about me”
“and then hold me accountable to it.”
From the episode
Tim Hockey and Tom Nally Discuss Robo Advisors
Tim Hockey