2009/2010 trends in executive development: a benchmark report€¦ · industrial revolution...

2009/2010 Trends in Executive Development: A Benchmark Report

Research AnalystsBonnie Hagemann, CEOExecutive Development Associates

Dr. Judy Chartrand, DirectorPearson’s TalentLens group

Copyright © 2009 by Executive Development Associates, Inc. All rights reserved. iii | Page

Table of Contents

Trends in Executive Development 1

Major Findings 2

Background on the Study 3Research Process 4Sample 4Selected List of Participating Companies 6Definitions 7

The Future of Executive Development 7Key Objectives 7Influential Conditions 9Hot Topics 11Next Generation Leaders: Competency Gaps 11Talent Pipeline and High Potentials (subhead) 13Participation in Development Activities 15Board of Directors 17

Executive Development Operations 18Developing Strategy and Policy 18Program Design and Development 19Funding and Staffing 20Measurement and Evaluation 22

Best Practices in Executive Development 23Innovations in Executive Development 25

Conclusions 26What Has Changed and What Remains the Same 26Recommendations for Your Organization 27

How to Obtain This Research 28

About Us 28

Proprietary Notice 28

Copyright © 2009 by Executive Development Associates, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 | Page

Trends in Executive Development

Every two years since 1983, Executive Development Associates, Inc. (EDA) has conducted a survey to help our clients and colleagues stay abreast of the trends, growth, and evolution of executive development in today’s ever-changing corporate environment. This year, we have partnered with Pearson’s TalentLens group, a team with deep research expertise, to bring you an analysis of trends in 2009.

We believe that one of the best learning resources for professionals in executive development is the knowledge and experience of peers. This in-depth analysis of the trends in the field of executive development is designed to uncover best practices, emerging needs, top priorities and new approaches and is based on some of the leading organizations in the world. By disseminating this information broadly, we hope to provide a resource for professionals to use when benchmarking their organization and to help those in the field advance together and stay abreast of critical trends in executive development.

As the industry has evolved over the years, we have endeavored to keep close tabs on the trends, innovations, struggles, and solutions in executive development and then to share both the important and the interesting with you, the executive development practitioner. With the 2009 research we expected some interesting changes in the field, and we were not disappointed.

The complexity within which executives must lead in today’s environment is mind-bending. Let’s face it, technology advancements alone are almost impossible to keep pace with, and that is just one of the critical issues today’s leaders must tackle. Add to that, leading across the global marketplace, economic turbulence, political unrest, and the new industrial revolution currently being driven by the twenty-somethings, and we have quite a recipe. All of this change rolled together creates an interesting environment for those who must design development opportunities that are sophisticated enough to prepare leaders to meet today’s challenges and yet simple enough to be delivered in a relatively short period of time with appropriate methods and mechanisms that reinforce learning.

The good news is that professionals in executive development, leadership development, organizational learning, and human resources are advancing as fast as their organizations will allow, and many have found their place as true business partners with CEOs and senior executives. They often work side-by-side to ensure that their organization’s executive talent is a true competitive advantage and they create development that is directly aligned with the strategic goals and objectives of the organization. They have learned to measure the success of development offerings and are adept at finding and creating relevant learning opportunities for the executives and for themselves.

The bad news is that many organizations still lack adequate executive development opportunities, and once we dip down below the Fortune 500, many organizations have little more than standard human resource procedures and off-the-shelf training. However, progress is coming to the middle market, and as these companies mature, they too can learn from some of the more sophisticated organizations that are represented in this trends research.

John F. Kennedy once said “Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other.” That has never been truer than it is today, so let’s take a look at trends in learning and development from senior leaders in some of the world’s most renowned organizations.

2 | Page Copyright © 2009 by Executive Development Associates, Inc. All rights reserved.

Major Findings As an introduction to this report, we want to highlight six emerging trends that stand out as most significant in the 2009 Report.

1. Impact of the Economy. The turn of economic events in our country over the last 10 months has shifted the fortunes of industries, businesses, and an untold number of individuals. The impact of this recession is quite evident—for the first time in the history of the trends survey, “Economic conditions” was rated as the most highly influential factor impacting executive development over the next two to three years. In prior surveys the topic was not even mentioned as a major influence. The economic downturn means that there is more pressure now than before to prepare leaders who can weather the storm and navigate their companies successfully through the turbulence.

2. Bench Strength is #1. The most notable theme throughout the survey was the importance of building bench strength. “Lack of bench strength” was identified as the second most influential factor impacting executive development (after Economic conditions), and “Increasing bench strength” was the top key objective in executive development. This theme has been building for a number of years, but the eminent retirement of baby boomers has pushed this issue to the forefront. In his book How The Mighty Fall: And Why Some Companies Never Give In, Jim Collins clearly connects the dots between bench strength and maintaining a competitive position in business, “If I were to pick one marker above all others to use as a warning sign, it would be a declining proportion of key seats filled with the right people”.

3. Accelerate the Development of High Potentials. Preparing high potentials is a major part of the bench strength equation. Respondents placed much greater emphasis on the identification and development of high potentials in the 2009 survey than in any of the prior surveys. It is interesting to note that 70% of the organizations have a formal high potential program/process in place, and about 40% of those organizations view their high potential program as an area of excellence.

4. Strategic Thinkers and Those Who Can Inspire. Respondents noted areas where the next generation of executive leaders are lacking necessary competencies. They highlighted weaknesses in the ability to think strategically, lead change, create a vision, and rally others around that vision. These qualities call for specific areas of further development within emerging leader programs. One EDA Advisory Board member noted that, “In my experience (across many countries) the capacity to stand back from operations and see where value is being created, where lost and where destroyed is critical, especially in the face of complexity. Thirty years ago Shell identified the step from operational to strategic management is the key risk for management failure.”

5. Better Metrics. Kilpatrick’s model has become the standard for measuring participant outcome, and the majority of organizations now measure all four levels of outcome. This is a notable shift from just four years ago, when evaluation metrics was a much more fragmented practice.

6. Leader-as-Teacher Model. The use of leaders as teachers has become a best practice that is growing in popularity. Respondents noted that it is a particularly effective component in their executive leadership programs. While fairly self-explanatory, this practice of engaging the organization’s most senior leaders in the development of those in the leadership pipeline is both effective and exciting. It gives senior leaders an opportunity


to pass on their crucial experiences and organizational knowledge. The teaching exchange fosters organizational culture building, and it allows senior leaders to engage in and endorse the learning and development of the up-and-coming leadership group. There are logistical issues with accessing face time with executives; however, the organizations who buy-in to this model find or make the time for such programs.

Background on the Study

The 2009 Executive Development Trends Research Report is the product of a collaborative partnership between Executive Development Associates, Inc. (EDA) and Pearson’s TalentLens group (“The Research Partners”). EDA has conducted executive development trends surveys in the United States, and more recently on a global basis, for the past 25 years. EDA’s research is designed to heighten awareness of the critical trends in executive development and to contribute to ongoing efforts to advance the state of the industry.

Pearson’s TalentLens group has sponsored research, as part of their assessment business, for over 85 years. Pearson is committed to supporting research that increases the field’s knowledge of key talent assessment and management issues.The information included in this report comes from a variety of sources, including our extensive biennial survey, interviews with leading organizations, and briefings with faculty and external providers of custom executive development solutions.

In addition to providing EDA’s independent industry expertise, perspective, and insight for the 2009 survey, we also reached out to EDA’s Advisory Board made up of the following experts:

• JimBolt,Founder, Executive Development Associates and Bolt Consulting • SandyOgg,Chief Human Resource Officer at Unilever • JimKouzes,Dean’s Executive Professor of Leadership, Leavey School of Business,

Santa Clara University, and coauthor of the bestselling and award-winning, The Leadership Challenge

• Dr.GillianStamp,Director Brunel Institute of Organisation and Social Studies (BIOSS) The Foundation; and former Director, BIOSS

• GeorgeConsolver,Former Director of Strategy Process, Texas Instruments, Consultant in Developing Strategy, Leadership, and Teamwork

• Dr.FariborzGhadar,W. Schreyer Professor of Management and the Founding Director of the Center for Global Business Studies at Smeal College of Business, Penn State University

• ChuckPresbury,Senior Director Leadership Development, McGraw-Hill• Dr.YuryBoshyk,Founding Director, Global Executive Learning• Dr.VijayGovindarajan,Earl C. Daum 1924 Professor of International Business and

the Founding Director of the Center for Global Leadership at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth

• Dr.RamCharan,Educator, Author, Consultant to CEOs• TedHoff,Vice President, Center for Learning and Development of the IBM Corporation • Dr.MaryJaneKnudson,Vice President of Human Resources, Fidelity Investments• ValerieNorton,Human Resources, Talent Management and Organizational

Development Executive, Strategy and Change Consulting Partner • Dr.JerryDavis,Retired Director of the Defense Acquisition University Senior Service

College Fellowship and CEO of Innovative Engineering Solutions

“EDA’s trends research arguably represents some of the deepest

and most comprehensive investigations and analyses of executive and leadership

development practices and related trends conducted to date.”

Christopher Bell, Ph.D., CEO, The Leadership Consortium,

Australia


Research Process The research review process itself involved:

• Reviewing raw data to identify the most significant responses (by percentage) for each question.

• Analyzing and comparing the responses to inter-related questions (either within or across survey sections).

• Analyzing and comparing responses to the same or substantially similar questions across surveys (i.e., across time).

• Evaluating the findings in the context of today’s business environment and international executive development research.

The Advisory Board assisted us by reviewing the previous version of the survey questionnaire to sug gest changes and enhancements, reviewing and analyzing the survey results and lending their expertise and insight to determine the most important findings and implications.

Sample Seventy-six organizations participated in the study with 72 completing the in-depth on-line survey and four participating through one-on-one interviews conducted by the Research Partners. Respondents worked in large national and multinational corporations with substantial business operations in the United States (87% had headquarters based in the United States). Survey respondents included:

• Chief Learning Officers• Senior Vice Presidents of Human Resources• Heads of Executive and Leadership Development

The majority of the organizations were public (61%), followed by private (32%), and non-profit (7%). To paint a picture of the organizations participating in the study, the distribution of industries, number of employees within an organization, and annual corporate revenue are graphically presented in Figures 1.1–1.3.


Figure 1.1. Respondent Organizations: Industry

Figure 1.2. Respondent Organizations: Number of Employees

Figure 1.3. Respondent Organizations: Revenue in U.S. Dollars


Selected List of Participating Companies Participating companies include, but are not limited to, the following:

Company

3MAbbottAlcon LaboratoriesAmerican ExpressAscension HealthAustralian Taxation OfficeBank of AmericaBlack & VeatchCabela’sCache Creek Casino ResortCentral TransportCerner CorporationChapman UniversityChevron Corp.CiscoCitrix Systems, Inc.Corning, IncCovidienCox CommunicationsDell CorporationDow ChemicalEMBARQEMD European Management Development CentreExecutive ForumFarmers InsuranceFederal Aviation AdministrationFluorFreightquoteGlaxoSmithKlineHallmarkHollingsworth & Vose CompanyHoneywellHoughton Mifflin Harcourt

Ingersoll RandIntel CorporationInternational PaperLaclede Gas CompanyLogitechMarathon OilMassMutualMcGraw-HillMerrill LynchMJMMSD Leadership Consultants, Inc.Navy Federal Credit UnionNestléNetAppNewPagePinnacle EntertainmentPPG Industries, Inc.RHISelective InsuranceSprintSt. Luke’s HospitalState Farm InsuranceStrategic Team-MakersSun MicrosystemsTBS, Inc.TD Bank Financial GroupThe Dow Chemical CompanyThe Hershey CompanyTomkinsUBSUnumVerizon CommunicationsVanity Fair CorporationVisteon Corporation


Definitions For the purpose of this survey,

• Executive/Leader is defined as anyone who falls into one or more of the following groups:

• Member of the Board of Directors • Chair of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, and President• Elected Officer • Corporate Vice President (including functional head) • Head/President of a group, division, business unit, or profit center• All people included in an executive compensation program

• Development is defined as any activity aimed at broadening executives’ knowledge and experience and enhancing their capabilities.

The Future of Executive Development

KeyObjectivesWe asked respondents to identify the key objectives that would be most important to their executive and leadership development efforts over the next two to three years. It is clear that the impending leadership gap, as baby boomers begin their eligibility for retirement, is on everyone’s mind. Not surprisingly, this gap emerged as the major issue in 2009, with “Increase bench strength” listed as a priority by 75% of the companies and “Accelerate development of high potentials” listed by 69% (see Table 1). These objectives hit the top of the list for the first time in 2004, and they remain there today.

For comparison, we also present the list of key objectives from the 2004 and 2000 Trends Surveys. Over the last decade, the war for talent has accelerated, superseding the role of supporting strategic objectives. It is clear that developing our next generation of leaders is a top initiative that is here to stay.

“Communicate vision and strategy and create alignment” (56%) continues to be a key objective, having been a top priority in the trends surveys for over 15 years. The objective “Address key business issues/challenges” (54%) made the top priority list in 2009 and 2000, but was not a top priority in the 2004 survey. Current economic conditions are forcing organizations to push vision, strategy, and key business issues and challenges into the spotlight. Chuck Presbury, Senior Director of Leadership Development at McGraw-Hill, supported the high priority of communicating vision and strategy with this rationale:

“ The economic currents are changing rapidly and we need to communicate continuously what is going on and what we need to do. The tough times are forcing us to fundamentally rethink our operations at so many levels, such as business models, customer needs, innovation, new competitors. This focus, coupled with the vision, tells me we are thinking about real issues and not simply reacting. We are keeping perspective on what works, inviting new ideas and new ways to create value, and involving and communicating with others—that’s very proactive, which is very healthy.”


Finally, “Increase cross-organization coordination & collaboration” (53%) emerged in the top list for the first time. The EDA Advisory Board responded to this trend by framing it as a key element of strategic thinking, management, and leadership. Lack of coordination and collaboration is very costly and the current economic conditions highlight those unnecessary transaction costs. Lack of coordination is experienced by customers and suppliers; the former will move on, and the latter will try to protect themselves by tightening contracts. Furthermore, “the rapid convergence of industries and technologies makes collaboration a critical factor. With globalization, a trend in one region quickly travels to other regions so cross regional collaboration is also becoming critical,” states globalization expert Dr. Fariborz Ghadar.

Table 1. Top 5 Priorities of Executive Development in the Next 2–3 Years

2009 2004 2000

1. Increase bench strength 1 4

2. Accelerate development of high-potentials 2

3. Communicate vision and strategy and create alignment 3 3

4. Address key business issues/challenges 2

5. Increase cross-organization coordination and collaboration

Support change/transformation 4

Support strategic objectives and implement 1

Develop individual leader capabilities 5

Make talent a competitive advantage 5

It is also important to look at objectives that were not important. At the bottom of the list (see Table 2), our research indicates that “Build awareness of new technology” is not a key objective. Given the fact that the incoming leadership force is more aware of and comfortable with newer technologies, this outcome is not a surprise. In fact, the bottom five are interesting, and worth a deeper look. “Support mergers/acquisitions” was third from the bottom and “Develop knowledge of competitors and their strategies” was fourth. This latter result is surprising because it is seen by most organizations as a key part of strategy. Given the fundamental importance of competitive analysis and the high failure rate of mergers/acquisitions, this low prioritization is curious.

“Support/leverage diversity” was also on the low priority list. Rapidly shifting demographics in the United States and the increased number of intergenerational workers (Generation Y, X, and Baby Boomers) suggest that leaders who are best prepared to leverage ethnically diverse talent and manage age differences in the workplace will have an advantage. In fact, Kenneth W. Gronbach, author of The Age Curve, How to Profit from the Coming Demographic Storm states that

“ The demographic dynamics in the workplace are about to change significantly. Generation Y born 1985 to 2004 will begin to put enormous upwards pressure on the entitled Generation X, born 1965 to 1984. Generation Y is huge, bigger than the Boomers. Y will face 20% unemployment as they flood the labor force creating an employers market. Gen X will be forced to do a reality check as the younger more technologically advanced Y takes over. Gen Y will not care about benefits, time off or bringing their dog to work. Y will be motivated by necessity and hunger. X will have to work harder or get out of the way. The remaining Boomers in the workforce will cheer Y on.”


That being said, the low priority of “Support/leverage diversity” is a missed opportunity for organizations. Our Advisory Board agreed, noting that some people assume that supporting diversity is “a given,” but the reality is quite different. Companies that want to win at building bench strength must learn to leverage diversity.

Table 2. Bottom 5 Priorities of Executive Development in the Next 2–3 Years

1. Build awareness of new technology

2. Launch or advance a major organizational turnaround3. Support mergers/acquisitions4. Develop knowledge of competitors and their strategies5. Support/leverage diversity

Influential ConditionsBusinesses operate within a larger milieu that is shaped by economic, political, social, and cultural currents. Executive development is clearly influenced by these broader dynamics, and by necessity, executive/leadership development initiatives must take these influential conditions into account. The recent failures within the financial services industry serve as a reminder of the interplay between these influential conditions and executive strategic awareness, and what happens when there is a disconnect.

When we looked for highly influential conditions that will impact executive development in the next two to three years, “Economic conditions” topped the list, which is no surprise, given the turmoil created by the current recession. Other influential conditions are listed in Table 3, and for comparison, the influential conditions of 2000 and 2004 are also presented. In 2009, the influential conditions center on changing business strategies, the need for organizations to work as a truly collective unit, and the need to innovate. It is a clear message that organizations need talented leadership who can inspire adaptability, collaboration, and innovation across an organization. Emerging leaders need to see beyond an operational lens and invoke a strategic view that captures the broad dynamics. A decade earlier the influential conditions centered on responding to internal management, competitors, and internal cultural changes. One of our advisors, Dr. Gillian Stamp, pointed out that some of the recent business failures could have been predicted by this response. Looking to the future, it is obvious that economic factors, shifting demographics, and business globalization are significantly impacting executive development.

Table 3. Top 5 Highly Influential Conditions

2009 2004 2000

1. Economic conditions (72%)

2. Lack of bench strength (64%) 1 5

3. Changing business strategies (63%) 2 1

4. Need for increased collaboration across the organization (53%) 4

5a. Need for increased innovation—3-way tie (44%)

5b. Need to change corporate culture (44%) 4

5c. Increased competition (44%) 3 3

Globalization 5

Demands of management 2


One piece of good news is that economic conditions are not seen as impacting expenditures. When we asked how respondents expected the total amount expended on executive development to change in the next two to three years, a significant majority expected it to either “Remain the same” (32%) or “Increase some” (43%). Only 15% expected it to decrease. So even during an economic downturn, executive development remains a key strategic initiative and is expected to receive a solid level of funding.

A big surprise came when we looked at the bottom five Influential Conditions (the lowest rated influential condition is shown as #1 in Table 4). We were surprised to see “Sustainability” and “Social responsibility” landing toward the bottom of the list. During tough economic times, issues such as sustainability and social responsibility can get relegated to the back burner. However, as organizations hire younger managers these issues are likely to become more important, because they are important to the younger generation of workers.

Table 4. Bottom 5 Highly Influential Conditions

1. Political unrest

2. Increase need for corporate social responsibility3. Advances in executive development practices4. Sustainability activities/requirements5. Downsizing

Nonetheless, the dramatic increase in corporate, consumer, and regulatory expectations for more sustainable business products and processes, the significant growth in corporate action on climate change, and the growing prevalence of green initiatives led us to expect that “Sustainability” and “Social responsibility” would have been rated higher as Influencers. We asked our colleagues at EKOS International, a leading sustainability strategy consulting firm, for their reactions. Here is what they said.

“We too fully expect Sustainability to be increasing as an influencer over the next 2–3 years. With over 25% of US Fortune 500 companies hiring Chief Sustainability Officers in 2008, over 80% of the Global Fortune 250 companies publishing a Corporate Social Responsibility Report in 2008 (up from 50% in 2005), and more than 5,000 companies overall reporting on their CSR annually, the importance of sustainability-related leadership and executive development seems critical. More research may help clarify the reasons behind, and implications, of this survey’s specific results. One initial view is that the survey respondents consisted primarily of chief learning officers and executive development and human resource leaders, who may not yet have a strong sense of how powerfully sustainability does indeed seem to be taking hold. Furthermore, only four of the 76 companies in the survey sample (Dell, GlaxoSmithKline, Intel, and Nestle) were among the Global 100 Most Sustainable Corporations announced in Davos in 2009, so these specific respondents’ views on the importance of sustainability may yet still be emerging. Finally, it may be possible that several of the “highly influential conditions” are in fact also sustainability-related, even though respondents did not specifically call them out as such, e.g., communicating vision and strategy and creating alignment, changing business strategies, increasing cross-organizational coordination and collaboration, and increasing innovation.


Judging from our experience, we anticipate that a wide range of specific executive competencies related to sustainability including cross-functional collaboration, leading innovation, systems thinking, enrolling people in strategic vision, seeing and implementing synergies, creating business opportunities in solving societal problems, building partnerships across the value stream, managing partnerships with external stakeholders, developing cross cultural competence, understanding and leading carbon constrained solutions, achieving breakthroughs in resource productivity, and more are all increasingly likely to be coming to the forefront in the years ahead.”

Hot TopicsWhen we look to the future of executive development, it is clear that focusing on next generation leaders is the top priority. Leadership has always been important, having been the number one topic in executive development since the trends survey was launched in 1983. Other hot topics also appear to have staying power. A look across three time periods 2009, 2004, and 2000 (see Table 5) shows how some topics remain contemporary while others fade.

Table 5. Top 5 Hot Topics in Executive Development in the Next 2–3 Years

2009 2004 2000

1. Leadership (creating vision, empowering others) 1 1

2. Business acumen 5

3. Strategy execution 4 2

4. Leading/managing organizational change 2 3

5. Talent management (attracting, assessing, retaining, etc.)

Managing human performance 3 5

Strategy formulation 4

The consistency across years simply shows that mastery in these areas is a fundamental part of executive development. Successful leadership requires business acumen, honing skills in strategy execution and leading/managing change. The one new addition in 2009 is “Talent management,” which is consistent with the major theme of this survey. For the first time, our respondents are acknowledging that talent management is a key component in executive/leadership training. In the past, talent management was viewed as an HR function. Now the impending talent shortage is a major issue, not only in the halls of the Human Resources department, but in the board room as well. The current generation of workers does not plan to stay with the same company for their entire career. Instead, they place higher priority on challenging work and opportunities for advancement. Leaders will need to know how to attract, manage, develop, and retain talent just as much as they need to know how to execute strategy.

NextGenerationLeaders:CompetencyGapsWhen we dig a little deeper and ask the participants to tell us what the next generation of leadership talent (the ones who are most likely to fill executive level positions in the next three to five years) are lacking, we found differences between executive skills and hot topics. This gap analysis is particularly important because there could be many leadership seats to fill and the impact of these gaps will be greater than any other time in recent history. The top five competencies most lacking in the next generation of leaders is shown in Table 6.


Table 6. Top 5 Competencies Most Lacking in the Next Generation of Leaders

1. Strategic thinking

2. Leading change3. Ability to create a vision and engage others around it4. Ability to inspire5. Understand the total enterprise and how parts work together

The competency gaps boil down to two key capabilities. One is critical thinking skills, which drive “Strategic thinking,” the “Ability to create a vision,” and the “Ability to understand the total enterprise and how parts work together”. Leaders need to be able to comfortably climb to the 30,000 foot view and analyze the system, but also adeptly analyze the information and decision made at lower levels. It is not an easy task. In a recent interview with USA Today, 3M CEO, George Buckley, clearly portrays the problem: “Leaders aren’t given the choice between dandelions and roses. It might be dandelions and chickweed. They are forced to make choices with too little time and too little information. It requires courage and a strong stomach. I might be forced to make a decision in five seconds, which will then be studied for months by a team of 40 lawyers. The job that leaders have is difficult, and there are increasingly few people capable of doing it.” (Jones, Del. “3M CEO George Buckley focuses on leadership training.” USA Today (2009, May 17).

It is useful to think about this competency within the context of what Nitin Nohria, professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School, calls “contextual intelligence”. He analyzed leading business figures in the United States over the past hundred years and concluded that all successful leaders were “shrewd in calculating the impact of factors such as globalization, government regulations and social mores.… What makes a leading business figure is the ability to understand and capitalize on the…trends influencing the market place of their time. “

EDA Advisory Board member Dr. Gillian Stamp recommended that more attention be given to teaching executives how to reflect, because reflection is the key element in the capacity to stand back and think strategically. From her experience, coaching and small group formats are very effective ways to develop reflection and critical thinking skills.

The other capability is positively motivating and influencing others, which drive “leading change,” the “ability to inspire,” and the ability to “engage others around a single vision”. Strategic leadership includes critical thinking, but it also includes a keen social intelligence and level of empathy that empowers and energizes healthy change.

Executive/leadership development initiatives may profit most by integrating the hot topics and the competency gap lists. Helping future leaders understand and strengthen their critical thinking and motivational capabilities is a good complement (and perhaps a good prerequisite) to more intellectually oriented models that teach business acumen, strategy, and execution. It is also worth mentioning that our respondents viewed the next generation leaders as having mastery over the technical side of the business, a high integrity mindset, the ability to deliver results, and to prioritize multiple demands of their time. Basically, the incoming leadership group knows how to perform successfully as individuals, and even as managers, but they have not yet made the leap to the next level—leadership, which requires more strategic thinking and the skill to positively motivate others.


Talent Pipeline and High Potentials (subhead)We thought it was important to ask respondents a number of questions about their talent pipeline and high potential program. To gauge progress, we started by asking respondents how they would compare their leadership talent pipeline today relative to two years ago, and the good news is 43% thought their pipeline was stronger. On a more negative note, 46% thought it was about the same, and 11% thought it was weaker. Given the concern respondents expressed about lack of bench strength, we were surprised that there wasn’t more progress in this area. One advisory board member stated,

“ Many industries did not hire or develop for years following past economic slowdowns. With downsizing and cost controls managers were not developed, so we now see a gap at the senior level. In some industries, such as pulp and paper, chemicals, petroleum, in the next few years as many as 60% of senior managers will retire and the pipeline is empty. Other industries have hired and trained consistently so this may not be as critical for them.”

Perhaps, the recognition that talent management is now an executive level competency will expedite progress. The impending leadership shortage may also move diversity initiatives from a ‘project’ status to a core source of talent acquisition. Overall, the key take away is that most companies do not yet rate their pipeline development program as an area of excellence, so one key opportunity within the executive/leadership development field is bolstering leadership pipeline programs.

In light of the current context, it may be necessary to reconceptualize leadership/pipeline development programs. As the advisory board noted, most existing pipeline models are based on the premise of long term career progression, especially within the organization. However, people are changing organizations with increasing frequency. So executive development professionals need to rethink their models to best support executives and offer the most robust pipeline programs.

A review of past trends surveys shows that high potential programs have become much more prominent over the last decade. In 2009, we asked respondents if they have a formal high potential identification program and the process they use to assess or identify high potential leaders. The results, which are shown in Table 7, show that 70% of the companies do have a program in place. However, the tools they use to identify high potentials vary widely.


Table 7. High Potential Identification

Formal High Potential Program/Process?

Yes 70%No 30%

Top 10 Processes Used to Assess/Identify High Potential Leaders

1. Senior executive opinions 75%

2. Judgment of immediate supervisor 70%

3. Formal talent review process 63%

4. Performance appraisal 61%

5. 360-degree survey feedback on company competencies 51%

6. Formal assessment instruments 39%

7. Peer review 18%

8, Psychological testing 18%

8. Assessment center 11%

10. Generic 360-degree survey leadership instrument 10%

Of the organizations that have a program in place, only 63% have a formal talent review process. It appears that “Senior executive” and “Immediate manager” judgments top the list as the most common rating strategy. This makes sense as the line needs to take proper responsibility for talent. However they also need to be supported and trained so that they can skillfully and consistently predict long term potential and success. Further discussion of how senior-level input comes into play is available in the T+D Magazine (July 2009) article called “Lessons from the Front Line: Harvesting Tomorrow’s Leaders” by Jim Bolt and Bonnie Hagemann. They review previous EDA research on the criteria line leaders use to identify high potentials and the methods they use to develop them.

As expected, “Performance appraisals” are common (61%), as are “360-degree survey tools that focus on company competencies” (51%). However, these tools address current competence rather than potential. Tools that work well for measuring potential— cognitive and personality tests and assessment centers—are slightly less common. “Formal assessment” (39%), “Psychological testing” (18%) and “Assessment centers” (11%) are also used to measure high potential. The diversity in this list suggests that the area of high potential identification has not fully matured to the point where most companies follow a common practice. Organizations appear to be using a combination of senior level input, 360-degree survey ratings, and psychological testing.

In an interview with Luanne Eskew, Vice President of Human Resources at Freighquote, she noted that they are having much success with their executive assessment program. Their program (administered by a third party) consists of an in-depth, structured assessment that provides a complete and objective view of an individual’s talents. The program is not just for high potentials, but is also used to determine who to hire, promote, and place on mission critical projects.

“ We value this program highly because it provides an objective view to an individual’s strengths and weaknesses. It is an additional piece of intelligence in making a hiring or promotion decision. In addition, it has helped the organization understand their key personnel and ensure they are in roles that speak best to their strengths, allowing them to better leverage core talents in the best possible way.”


Getting high potentials ready to move up the career ladder is certainly a priority. Companies weighed in on the most effective ways to accelerate the development of high potentials. The results are in Table 8 and they support the 70/20/10 rule, which recommends 70% on-the-job, 20% through executive coaching and mentoring, and 10% through formal training. “Stretch assignments,” “Action learning that involves working in teams on real organizational challenges,” and “Job rotation” are particularly effective on-the-job activities. “Executive coaching” and “360-degree survey feedback” are the most effective coaching strategies. And as expected, formal training, such as Internal education and “External education,” are on the list, but at a lower level of impact than on-the-job and coaching activities. One EDA advisor, George Consolver, noted that shared learning activities that include both formal and informal access to top leaders are invaluable. Through access to top leaders, high potentials realize that they are highly valued, and the informal time gives both the top leaders and the high potentials an opportunity to get a feel for each other.

Table 8. Top 10 Processes Most Effective in Accelerating High Potential Development

1. Stretch assignments 74%

2. Executive coaching 61%3. Action learning 57%4. 360-degree survey feedback 57%5. Job rotation 48%6. Mentoring 44%7. Internal education 30%8. International assignment 29%9. Internal networks 27%

10. External education 25%

Participation in Development Activities An important decision for many companies is to determine how many days per year executives/leaders should devote to development and what type of development activities they should engage in. We asked respondents to estimate the percentage of top executives, VP executives, and high potential managers who will participate in formal development activities on an annual basis, and the number of days per year they would participate.

Before reviewing those results, we want to share an impressive example of extensive development that comes from Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies Plant. They put their high potentials through a one year internship. Mike Kelly of the Kansas City plant stated,

“ The internship produces a leader who understands the technology of nuclear weapon systems and can effectively manage programs involving those systems. The intern works with experienced technical leaders at the design lab agencies, other production facilities, and the National Nuclear Security Administration/Department of Energy in both classroom and on-the-job settings. The program exposes interns to all aspects (design, manufacture, and delivery) of weapon systems. This provides important building blocks for the foundation of future leadership positions that the intern will earn and maintain in their home organization.”


The survey results are shown in Table 9. The average (mean) is presented, but it is important to note that the range across companies was very wide. The percentage of executives participating on an annual basis ranged from 0 to 100 and the number of days in the classroom ranged from 0 to 20.

A quick look at Table 9 shows that respondents expect high potentials and VP level executives to spend more time in development than top executives, which is not surprising. What is surprising is that the numbers aren’t higher for high potentials and VP level–executives—the group that is preparing to replace the retiring baby boomers. The other results in the trends survey suggest that the percentages should be much higher if companies want to remain competitive.

Table 9. Percent of Executives Participating in Development

Level Participating (Mean) # of Days in the Classroom (Mean)

Top Executive 38% 4VP Executive 53% 6High Potential 64% 8

We also asked respondents which types of activities they would be most likely to participate in, and the results are presented in Table 10.

Table 10. Development Activity Participation by Executive Level

Top Level VPLevel High Potential Activity

67% 70% 51% Executive coaching41% 30% 10% Participation in external boards

38% 51% 48%Custom program with external

vendor33% 40% 29% University program

29% 51% 48%Custom program with internal

team

29% 30% 33%Non-university external public

programs27% 54% 68% Development job assignment27% 21% 9% Teaching24% 37% 49% Action learning program21% 22% 23% Custom university program17% 35% 52% Mentoring

9% 10% 33% Off the Shelf—Tailored 6% 12% 29% Web On-line—External vendor6% 8% 17% Web On-line—Internal5% 13% 12% Community service

2% 4% 6% Off the Shelf—As is

Understandably, different development activities are used at different executive levels. For the top level group, executive coaching is clearly preferred. Other frequent development activities include serving on external boards, and custom programs or other non-university external programs. For VP level executives, coaching is also preferred, but development job assignments are next, followed by custom programs. For high potentials, development job assignments are the clear preference, followed by mentoring, and then executive coaching.


It is also notable that web-based and computer-based learning methods are expected to be used by 36% of companies surveyed. This would be surprisingly high usage among executives, who in our experience use computer- and web-based tools for quick, specific applications rather than more open-ended, reflective processes such as training and development (if at all). However, as the need for leadership training intensifies and moves down the ladder, blended training activities are likely to have increased applicability.

Board of Directors Continuing the tradition started in 2004, we asked respondents about the types of development activities their organization is currently providing to Board Members. EDA’s Chief Strategy Officer, Richard Zahn, offers insight into the emerging training needs of boards. He noted that “Board of Directors are coming under increasing scrutiny to provide regulatory and financial guidance to their companies. The changing world of regulation and compliance makes it mandatory that members of Boards are regularly updated and informed on the regulations under which their companies operate. But more importantly if Boards are to fulfill their role of providing strategic guidance to the companies they serve then they need to have ongoing professional development about leading thoughts, industry, strategy, leadership and society trends and best practices. This and their experiences outside the firm will enable them to provide sound strategic input. A final area that is often overlooked is that Boards need to learn to communicate effectively with each other and with their executives. There is a need to build the Board as a team that functions effectively in their role. All of this requires a thoughtful, meaningful and continual process of education and development for the Board.”

From the 2009 survey, the list of development activities for boards is rich and includes leadership development, strategic reviews, global symposia, talent reviews, and timely current topics. One activity that was not mentioned was board governance, which is surprising. An activity that was mentioned numerous times was training related to regulatory compliance, Sarbanes-Oxley workshops. Below are a few additional development activities that are provided to board members:

• 30–45 minute briefings on a strategic subject by an outside expert• Specialized training regarding timely topics, such as change in regulations or

review of techniques for advancing the capabilities of our leaders• Systematic well deployed talent review process which includes the board of

directors’ involvement • External thought leaders are brought in as guest speakers • Leader and teacher offerings such as global symposiums offered by universities

or consultants• On-line regulatory compliance training• Personal coaching


Executive Development Operations

Developing Strategy and Policy Going forward, the top strategic priorities (as shown in Table 11) are the creation of strategies and systems that integrate all talent management processes and executive/leadership management activities. These priorities are coupled with the priority to systematically measure and evaluate programs and processes, and benchmark organizations that lead the way in best practices. Rounding out the top five is the creation of a core corporate curriculum and a milestone system to insure that key leaders are receiving the training they need for success at key transition periods throughout their career (e.g., newly appointed to executive level).

The need for integrated systems was in the priority list in both 2004 and 2009. The difference in 2009 is that an integrated talent management system has moved to the forefront as the top priority. This shift reflects the maturing of the industry as strategies, processes, and programs become more aligned both vertically and horizontally across the organization. Core curriculum and creation of milestone courses first appeared on the top list in 2004 and they remain priorities in 2009.

Table 11. Top 5 Strategy and Policy Activities to be Emphasized in the Next 2–3 Years

1. Creation of a strategy and system that integrates all talent

management processes60%

2. Creation of a strategy and system that integrates all executive/

leadership development activities55%

3. Use of systemic measurement/evaluation to measure impact

of efforts43%

4. Benchmarking “best practice” organizations 42%

5. Creation of a core corporate curriculum 40%

Planning and Needs Analysis

Tailoring programs to effectively meet the needs of executives is the starting point of a well developed program. Table 12 shows the major ways respondents plan to identify executive development needs.

Table 12. Top 5 Planning and Needs Analysis Activities to be Emphasized in the Next 2–3 Years

1. Use top management requests/suggestions to identify needs 68%

2. Use 360-degree survey feedback results to identify

development needs61%

3. Analysis of aggregate talent review results of target population 51%

4. Use of advisory board/steering committee 44%

5. Interview with prospective participants to identify needs 41%


The top two methods—“Top management input” and “Use of 360-degree survey results—were the top two methods in both 2000 and 2004. The third method, “Analysis of aggregate talent review results of target population” also came in third in 2004. This level of continuity suggests that development professionals continue to favor the perspective of senior management combined with 360-degree survey results. This is certainly not surprising. Although some senior managers may not be fully aware of key needs, it is essential to get their perspective and buy-in. Coupling this with more objective needs analyses strategies, like 360-degree survey feedback results, is a good balance between qualitative and quantitative input.

Somewhat surprisingly, “Interview with prospective participants to identify needs,” has dropped in popularity. In 2000 it was the third most preferred method, in 2004 it was fourth, and in 2009 it is fifth. We do not know why this method has decreased in relative popularity, but the EDA Advisory Board and other experts in the field continue to endorse the value of interviewing prospective participants to understand their needs.

Program Design and DevelopmentInfluential conditions (e.g., economic conditions, lack of bench strength), shifting objectives, and changing content requirements all influence program design and development. Table 13 shows how those factors are impacting the types of activities that will be emphasized in the next two to three years.

Table 13. Top 5 Types of Activities Emphasized in 2–3 years

1. Internal design of strategies, courses/programs 62%

2. Use of outside consulting firm to design/develop strategies,

courses/programs47%

3. Systematic evaluation procedures to measure business impact 46%

4. Training to upgrade design/development skills of internal staff 44%

5. Systematic evaluation procedures to measure impact on

individual performance41%

The anticipated rise in popularity of internally designed programs is a notable shift. In 2004, use of outside consultants was the most popular choice for program design by a wide margin. In 2009, the preference for internal training over external has flipped, with the shift probably attributable to cost considerations.

Inclusion of systematic evaluation procedures to measure business impact has also moved up the ranks. It was noted in 2004 (ranked #5), but not mentioned in 2000. Increased emphasis on ROI could be a reflection of the economic times (e.g., needing to justify dollars spent) or a maturing of the field. The training to upgrade design/development skills of internal staff gels with the expectation that internally designed programs will be used more frequently. In prior trends surveys (both 2000 & 2004), energy was devoted to research or benchmarking new program designs. This activity did not make the top list, suggesting that best practices may be better understood now and more focus will be on training staff to implement those practices.


Funding and Staffing Operationally, executive development seems to have a steady stride that is only mildly affected by the current economic turbulence. Most companies expect the total amount expended on executive development to increase (52%) or stay the same (32%). A more detailed breakdown is shown in Table 14. The annual average expenditure per executive for internal, external, and on-the-job training is also shown in Table 14.

Table 14. Amount Spent on Executive Development in the Next 2–3 YearsIncrease considerably 9%Increase some 43%Remain the same 32%Decrease some 14%Decrease considerably 2%

Average Annual Expenditure per Executive

Formal external classroom

education/development events

(such as university executive)

Internal classroom-based

education/development events

(including action learning and

outdoor experiential events)

Developmentjobassignments,

specialprojects,etc.

Average: $23,531 US Average: $16,887 US Average: $6,748 US31 companies 35 companies 27 companies

Regardless of the level of expenditure, executive education and development is truly a meaningful investment for any organization. Professionals such as doctors, attorneys and accountants are required to attend continuing education on an annual basis. Should the leaders of organizations require any less?

Executive development is, of course, an expense and when organizations must cut back on their expenses they can take the opportunity to innovate. During our interview process, we found companies like Sprint who indicated that they have gone down in resources but up in creativity. They have moved to a leader led or a one-to-many approach to get the job done.

The most common practice of funding is for companies to charge some of the costs back to the participants’ budget (42%), followed by the corporation paying for all costs (36%), the business unit paying for all costs (28%), and finally, the corporation charging all costs back to the participants’ budget (22%). These results are very similar to those found in 2004, which suggests continuity in funding practices (see Figure 2).


Figure 2. Who Pays for Executive Development Costs

StaffingThe average number of people serving in roles committed primarily to the field of executive development at headquarters varied widely, ranging from 0 to 20, with company size impacting the numbers. The majority of the respondents expected the number of executive development staff at headquarters to either “Increase” (26%) or “Remain the same” (63%).

The number of people serving in roles committed primarily to the field of executive development throughout the entire organization also varied (see Figure 3). Again, respondents expected the number of executive development staff across the organization to either “Increase” (22%) or “Remain the same” (65%).

Figure 3. Number of Full-Time Staff in Executive Development Roles


Measurement and Evaluation The process of program and individual performance measurement is now standard operating procedure, with the Kirkpatrick model serving as the primary method of measurement. New methods are emerging as well, which lends a richer picture of outcomes and benefits of development.

Measurement and evaluation is an area where significant change has occurred over the last five years, and it is good news for the profession. More companies are evaluating results and behaviors, having moved beyond participant reaction. Figure 4 shows that executive development professionals expect that Level 3 and 4 evaluation will be more prevalent in the next two to three years than they did in 2004.

Figure 4. Level of Evaluation Used in the Next 2–3 Years

The shift in evaluation practices over the past five years is one of the highlights in the 2009 survey results. Executive development professionals are still using participant feedback (Level 1), but they are now more likely to measure learning (Level 2), and much more likely to measure transfer of knowledge (Level 3), and the impact of development on actual business factors, such as productivity, profit, service quality (Level 4). Outcome metrics have become more substantive, and respondents are directly connecting executive development efforts to business results. In 2004, respondents were trying out creative approaches, but overall, they were clearly struggling with measurement and evaluation. The 2009 results suggest that more rigorous evaluation practices have been adopted. There is still room for more improvement, with 33% of the respondents seldom measuring ROI (Level 4), but the gains made over the last five years have been impressive.

Respondents commented on methods they use to measure individual performance and business performance. In 2004 the comments were quite diverse. In 2009 several themes emerge:


Individual Performance• Use of 360-degree surveys and feedback that are also tied to performance objectives

or competency models • Completion of formal development plans • Succession readiness, e.g., “succession readiness based on development and

ensuing action”

Business Performance• Bench strength was the most common theme, e.g., “Strength of the leadership

pipeline,” “Number of individuals with portable skills,” and “Bench strength for key positions”

• Financial metrics, e.g., “P&L of unit,” “Execution of current business profit plans,” “Last five years average and improvement over the last five years average ROIC, organic growth, EBIT, profit margin”

Best Practices in Executive Development

When respondents were asked about the best practices most critical to the success of an executive development program, we were happy to see that being “Linked to Strategy” hit the top of the list, with 88% ranking this as #1. The practice of linking executive development to the strategic goals and directions of the organization was first introduced as a best practice by Jim Bolt in his 1985 Harvard Business Review article, “Tailor Executive Development to Strategy”.

The remaining top 10 best practices are shown in Table 15. These practices are the blueprint for successful executive/leadership development programs. In addition to the importance of being linked to strategy, they emphasize support by top management, integration into systems, and processes that combine leadership profiles, multi-rater feedback, and individual development plans.

“This encouraging finding makes it crystal clear that we’ve come a long way in the last 25 years. When I wrote the HBR article, executive development typically meant sending a few high potential leaders off to university mini-MBA open-enrollment programs. Now it more likely involves custom-designed internal programs/processes used to develop the specific capabilities needed to achieve the organization’s strategic objectives. This shift from ‘traditional to strategic’ is by far the most important trend in the field of executive development.”

Jim Bolt


Table 15. Top 10 Best Practices Most Critical to the Success of an Executive Development Program

1. Linked to strategy

2. Top management driven3. Leadership profile, feedback, and development plans4. Action learning5. High potential identification and development6. Integrated talent management system7. Custom designed8. Succession management9. Long term integrated strategy and system

10. Measurement

Respondents were also asked where their organization excels in term of implementing best practices. In another success for the field, the respondents felt that their organizations excelled at linking executive development to strategy, with 59% responding that this is their current #1 best practice.

Another exciting trend is that top management is becoming more involved in developing organizational leaders. They are supporting the programs being rolled out by industry professionals, and more importantly, championing key strategic practices and offering to serve as a leader-teacher, when appropriate. Finally, we found that having “Custom-designed executive development programs” and “High potential identification and development,” plus using tools such as “Leadership profile, feedback and individual development plans” led the pack in best practices.

It is interesting to compare the current areas of excellence with those from 2004 (Table 16). The best practices are quite consistent over time. “High potential identification and development” made the list in 2009, replacing “Action learning”. Given the pressing need to build bench strength, the authors were encouraged to see high potential identification and development become a top area of excellence.

Table 16. Top 5 Best Practices in Which Your Organization Excels

2009 2004

1. Linked to strategy Custom designed

2. Top management driven Linked to strategy

3. Custom designed Top management

4. High potential identification/

development

Leadership profile/feedback/IDPs

5. Leadership profile/feedback/IDPs Action learning

Another best practice that has continued to gain ground is the leader-as-teacher model. Among our respondents, this has proven to be an incredibly effective and efficient way to develop organizational executives and high potentials, followed closely by “leaders who walk the talk.” This trend coincides with the shift to increased internal development activities, and it is a highly-valued component by participants, organizational leaders, and internal and external development professionals.


When it comes to best practices, we asked specifically about the most effective uses of on-the-job development. We found that “Putting someone in a stretch assignment” or “Special assignments” ranked at the top, as shown in Table 17.

Table 17. Top 5 Most Effective Uses of On-the-Job Development

1. Putting someone in a “stretch” assignment

2. Special assignments3. Being coached4. Having both headquarters and business unit experience5. Having a profit and loss responsibility

Ranking near the bottom of the list was “Community service,” “Placing someone on a board of directors,” “Running a business away from the home office,” and “Coaching another leader”. Respondents favored direct on-the-job learning over indirect activities, such as community service or board work.

Innovations in Executive Development In the 2009 trends survey we continued the tradition of asking respondents to describe the most innovative practices they were aware of in the field of executive development. In 2009, leader-as-teacher came to the forefront. Many respondents noted this, saying that it was not innovative, per se, but that it was the essential element of their program.

In an interview with Hallmark Corporation, we learned about an innovative high-potential program that is directly linked to community service. Hallmark’s closely linked, Hallmark Foundation, identifies leadership opportunities that benefit the community and are directly related to the top leadership competencies for Hallmark Corporation. The corporation’s high potential program participants receive an assignment in the community, an action learning initiative, a mentor relationship with a learning coach, an executive coach, and two days of group-based learning with a Futurist.

Other innovative activities include talent forecasting, development programs that are designed to scale and meet just-in-time requirements, leadership team building, more advanced international rotations, custom simulations, and entrepreneurial training. Several respondents’ comments are listed to illustrate the innovative activities that could become the next trends in the field.

• Just-in-time, agile, scalable training programs like the BusinessWeek EDGE program.• Custom simulations that include business acumen, culture, leadership, and

execution through others, all in one. • Virtual tournaments and annual strategy offsite, strategy simulations.• Team leadership development program with entire team over three month period.• International talent program aimed at grooming young high potentials to GM level.

Candidates are recruited internally and externally, and complete interviews and assessment centres. Successful candidates are placed in planned job rotations—different roles and different countries (three roles in three countries over time). A successful five year period leads to a direct appointment into a senior role.

• Garage entrepreneurial projects in conjunction with internal venture-capital board.


It is interesting to look back five years to see what was seen as innovative in 2004. “Action learning” was mentioned most frequently. Others noted “Integrated talent management” as an innovation. “Competitive global business experience” was also mentioned. Overall, the list was richer and more diverse in 2009 than in 2004. It appears that organizations are being more innovative and creative in response to the burgeoning talent gap.

Conclusions

What Has Changed and What Remains the SameA quote from the 2004 survey illustrates the continued importance of talent development and retention. “It is crystal clear that increasing bench strength and accelerating the development of high potential managers will be critical objectives.” We believe that these priorities are even more important now than they were in 2004; it is clear that talent is the top priority.

Similarly, leadership was the number one topic in executive development in 2009, and it has been for 25 years. Given the fundamental importance of leadership, it is likely to retain the top spot for the next 25 years as well. Business skills (e.g., business acumen, strategy execution) and change management continue to be important topics in executive development. What is new and different is the emergence of talent management (attracting, assessing, retaining,) as an essential topic in executive development. Organizations are recognizing that their leaders must be talent experts. This shift bodes well for the field as the emerging leader set is likely to be better versed on (and hopefully more deeply supportive of ) talent management and development initiatives, processes, and programs. However, there is still much work to be done with the current leadership to increase awareness and understanding of the importance of talent management. Executive development professionals need to continually work to gain the support of our most senior leaders and a seat at the strategy table where impact is maximized.

Another change is the expansion and growing maturity of high potential programs. A decade ago, high potential identification and development was in its infancy. Now, many organizations view their high potential programs as an area of strength. However, the diversity with which high potentials are identified suggests no single methods or process has risen to the top as a best practice methodology. High potential development is still most accurately viewed as an evolving area and we expect to see continued growth and maturity in this area in our next survey.

A final change that we want to highlight is the significant improvement in the way executive development is measured and evaluated. In the past, it was clear that organizations were struggling to quantify the outcomes of their development efforts. Today, a common methodology is in place (Kilpatrick’s model) and is being consistently implemented. This accomplishment is a rousing success for the field and will undoubtedly help the profession articulate its business value. This is exciting because it speaks to the overall maturing of the industry. Finally, we are seeing with increasing frequency that learning professionals now have the history and return-on-investment data to have influence across their organization and to vie for the necessary resources needed to implement their programs.


RecommendationsforYourOrganizationAlways a stickler for practicality, we hope that you are able to put the information in this report to immediate use in your organization. We believe the key components to successful executive development are:

1. Educated, engaged and supportive senior leadership. We do not expect that all organizations will have this in place. Remember we are on a journey and our readers may be at many different points along the path; however, if your organizational leaders are not there yet, continue to use your influence to move them in this direction over time.

2. Programs that are closely aligned with your organization’s overall vision and strategy3. A clear understanding by executives and high-potentials being developed of

how development goals and activities tie in with the vision and strategy of the overall organization.

4. High quality individual assessment, feedback and coaching, with direct line of site back to the corporate vision and values.

5. Development activities tied to real initiatives that have a meaningful impact on the organization, individuals, customers, and when possible, the greater community.

Finally, we would also like to make recommendations based on the feedback from the 2009 trends survey. These recommendations are as follows:

1. Benchmark your organization’s executive development practices against other leading organizations. While this report is an excellent tool, there are also more formal benchmarking processes available that provide more information specific to your organization and are tied directly to your organization’s strategy.

2. Conduct a working session with your senior leadership team to review the survey highlights and compare the key findings with your organization’s programs, processes, and strategies. Top management support is a critical success factor.

3. Identify the leadership capabilities needed and the gaps you currently have so that you know what you need and the gap you need to close to achieve your vision, address your marketplace challenges, and execute your strategy.

4. Assess your leaders—match them against required capabilities, design strategies, systems, and processes—to bridge the gap both individually and corporately.

5. Identify what you believe are the core, critical components of your effective executive talent management system. Work to systematically add and improve key areas to enhance your organization’s success.

6. Align your executive development strategy both vertically and horizontally across the organization.

7. Create accountability by tying leadership development to the core leadership competencies and to executives’ annual performance measures.

8. Establish and implement metrics that matter to top management and report them regularly.

9. Continually review and refine your development process.

Above all, remember that it’s a journey and a privilege to impact the lives of others through learning and development.


How to Obtain This Research

Please contact Executive Development Associates at (866) EXEC DEV. Additional copies of this industry report are available for purchase at executivedevelopment.com. We will be presenting highlights of this research at webinars and other events throughout the coming year. These events are posted at both executivedevelopment.com and TalentLens.com.

Benchmarkyourorganization:If you are interested in benchmarking your organization against the best practices developed in this industry study, please contact us. Our Rapid Cycle DiagnosticSM and Advisory Council service will provide your organization with the data, recommendations, and strategic insights to determine the best course of action to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of your executive development strategy.

For more information on our research and services, please contact Executive Development Associates at (866) EXEC DEV.

About Us

Executive Development Associates is a leader in creating custom-designed executive development strategies, systems, and programs that help organizations build the capabilities needed to achieve their strategic objectives. EDA leads the way in the use of executive development to help organizations successfully address their marketplace challenges and accelerate the execution of their business strategy. With our proven ability to achieve results we create measurable improvements in both individual executive performance and business outcomes.

Executive Development Associates 13431 N Broadway Extension, Suite 104 Oklahoma City, OK 73114 USA

Contact Information Toll Free: 866. EXEC DEV (393.2338) Phone: 405.751.3300 Fax: 405.751.3313 [email protected] executivedevelopment.com

Pearson’s TalentLens group publishes scientific assessments that are used globally to hire and develop the twenty-first century workforce. Our instruments measure critical thinking, problem solving, and a range of job skills to deliver data-driven insights that inform and clarify an organisation’s human capital decisions. Learn more at TalentLens.com.au

Pearson’s TalentLens group19500 Bulverde Road San Antonio, TX 78259 USA

Contact Information Australia & NZPhone: (Aus) 1800 882 385 FPhone: (NZ) 0800 942 722TalentLens.com.au

Proprietary Notice

Copyright © 2009 Executive Development Associates and Pearson Education, Inc. or its associates. All rights reserved. Rapid Cycle Diagnostic SM is a registered trademark of Executive Development Associates. No materials from this study can be duplicated, copied, republished, or re-used without written permission from Executive Development Associates.

2009/2010 trends in executive development: a benchmark report€¦ · industrial revolution...

Documents