Rethinking Leadership Development, Competency Confusion & What Happens Afterwards | Talent and Performance Development |

When your manager or colleagues finish their leadership program, do they demonstrate sustained improvements? Unless their post-program behavior changes, unless they do something differently, there is no return on investment.  

There's also the assumption that all leaders in a given company must demonstrate excellence on a defined set of leadership competencies.

But the [competency] paradigm doesn't work. Excerpts from the four reasons why:

Many competencies cannot be improved. Competencies are a mixed bag. Some are skills (e.g., strategic thinking), some are personality traits (e.g., drive to achieve), some are knowledge (e.g., market insight), and some are talent (e.g., good judgment). Skills and knowledge can be improved, but personality traits and talent cannot. ...No "Drive to Achieve" class is going to change that.

Competency models are unfocused. Abbott Laboratories (ABT_) uses 24 competencies...The U.S. Department of Labor's management competency model uses 60 ... Ridiculous.

...If a leader is world-class in operational excellence but poor in strategic thinking, he/she must add an outstanding strategic thinker to the leadership team.

Related posts by Deb: