How to run a 45-minute presales development review
An agenda for discussing three presales development profiles, examining evidence and agreeing coaching support with a useful checkpoint.
On this page
A small leadership review can make room for a useful discussion of three development profiles. Prepare the observations beforehand, give each person a defined period of attention and finish with a clear owner for the next step.
The agenda below is a suggested 45-minute working session. It assumes preparation has already happened and covers three people, not an entire large team. Extend or split the session when the evidence needs more discussion. The timebox is a facilitation proposal, not a measured productivity result.
Set the purpose before asking for feedback
Write a short brief: the work under discussion, the evidence period, the relevant role expectations and the purpose of the review. A development conversation needs a clear boundary from pay, promotion or disciplinary decisions. Follow the appropriate organisational process when those decisions are involved.
The CIPD feedback practice summary recommends separating administrative appraisal conversations from feedback intended to support development. That distinction helps us state what this agenda is for: choosing practice, support and a way to review progress.
Decide who needs to attend and what each person is entitled to see. An individual contributor should understand how their observations and resulting plan will be used. Private preparation still carries employee-data responsibilities; follow your organisation's access, processing and retention arrangements.
Prepare a short evidence sheet for each person
Use the working review sheet. Record the expectation, dated observations, source, relevant context and unresolved questions. A narrower task may be more useful than a judgement about the entire role.
Collect self and relevant partner input independently when you are using those perspectives. Avoid exposing another source's answers to help someone complete their own. Preserve “not observed”. Ask for further evidence rather than filling a blank with a low score.
You can also prepare your own first impression. Mark it as exploratory. Keep private map access separate from permission to present formal feedback. A shared screen should contain only material approved for the people in the meeting.
Use the session to examine decisions
Scroll sideways to read the whole table.
| Minutes | Activity | Output |
|---|---|---|
| 0–5 | Confirm purpose, scope, visibility and criteria | A shared review brief and permission to defer uncertain decisions |
| 5–14 | Review person one | Evidence gaps, one development priority and proposed support |
| 14–23 | Review person two | The same bounded output |
| 23–32 | Review person three | The same bounded output |
| 32–40 | Check practice opportunities and manager commitments | A feasible plan for each person |
| 40–45 | Confirm owners, communication and checkpoints | A short decision record and follow-up actions |
Within each person's nine minutes, spend the first two explaining the work and observations. Use the next four to explore differing interpretations and gaps. Use the final three to propose the development action and identify anything that needs a later conversation.
The agenda supports a focused discussion; it should not force agreement to keep the meeting on time. Record an unresolved question when that is the honest output.
Keep the picture connected to its evidence
If you show a Skill–Will matrix, name the perspective, cycle and axis meanings. Talentonics uses Skill vertically and Will horizontally. A private exploratory position is different from a placement summarised from recorded assessment evidence.
For a fictional example, a leader initially thinks Casey needs more technical training. Their notes show that Casey handles the technical discussion well but struggles to confirm the customer's success criteria. The next question concerns the discovery and closing process. A broad training prescription would have missed the actual work to practise.
Ask which example supports the proposed action. Identify what the individual says about it and where the reviewers had different exposure. If a view changes, record the reason for the formal decision while preserving the source observations.
Make the support as concrete as the expectation
A useful proposal for Casey might be to lead a success-criteria recap on the next suitable engagement. The manager reviews the preparation, helps secure the opportunity and joins a debrief afterwards. The evidence is the agreed criteria and an account of what Casey handled independently.
Check feasibility before closing the session. Is a suitable engagement likely? Can the promised coaching happen? What will the person need access to? For unfamiliar or complex work, use a learning goal that makes practice possible instead of demanding a business outcome beyond the person's control.
Agree the plan with the individual in the appropriate coaching conversation. A leadership meeting's proposal should leave room for their perspective and aspirations.
Close with a checkpoint people can use
At the checkpoint, inspect the work and the support that occurred. Discuss what changed, what still needs help and the next useful opportunity. Update the plan if the context changed. An upward movement on a chart is insufficient by itself to explain progress.
Talentonics provides a protected presentation view for formal team material and an optional control to hide names. Hiding names is a display convenience; the surrounding context can still identify people. The personal first-pass map is excluded from that presentation. The map’s next step opens feedback, review or coaching for the current stage. Sharing a separate snapshot with selected leaders is a deliberate action.
If you are preparing your first review, start with the worksheet and a small scope. Try the fictional Talentonics workspace to explore the evidence and coaching views before setting up your own. The practical matrix guide explains the framework and its limits.