L-Score — Legitimacy Score

Leadership decisions here are generally made in the interest of the organisation rather than any individual

When leadership makes commitments, I expect those commitments to be honoured

People in authority here use their position to serve the institution's purpose rather than their own

I would describe the relationship between leadership and staff as genuinely collaborative

The quality of institutional leadership has been stable or improving over the past 12 months

Leaders here take responsibility when things go wrong rather than deflecting

People in leadership positions earned their authority through demonstrated trustworthiness

Decisions I observe here consistently serve the organisation's interest rather than leadership's personal interest

All authority-holding roles have formally documented mandates

Mandate boundaries are respected in practice — authority is exercised within its defined scope

When mandate overreach occurs, it is identified and corrected through formal processes

Authority is consistently exercised within the boundaries of its original mandate

Mandate documentation is current and has been reviewed within the last 12 months

Hiring processes explicitly assess trustworthiness alongside competence

Promotion decisions weigh demonstrated integrity as heavily as performance metrics

Exit interview data is systematically reviewed by those responsible for hiring decisions

People who demonstrate high trust and moderate competence are valued as highly as those with high competence and moderate trust

The institution has mechanisms to detect when high-competence low-trust individuals accumulate authority

Recent promotions and appointments would score well on legitimacy dimensions, not just performance

The institution invests in developing trust-building capacity in its leaders

Selection and advancement processes are periodically audited for trust-competence balance

My experience of working here has been consistent with what I was promised when I joined

The gap between institutional rhetoric and daily reality has been narrowing over time

Grievances that are raised here are addressed in ways that feel genuine rather than performative

I have confidence that the institution's trajectory over the next two years will be positive

What leadership says and what actually happens have become more aligned over the past 12 months

People here feel that the institution's direction reflects their interests, not just leadership's

The conditions of my work have improved or remained stable over the past 12 months

I intend to still be here in two years