Purchase this article as a standalone PDF with full colour magazine layout

The demand for effective leadership in organizations continues to grow, with investments in leadership development increasing annually. Training Magazine reported that organizations in the UK invested approximately £7.5 billion in leadership development in 2023. Many argue that much of this spend is wasted on ineffective programs that do not fill leaders or their organizations with confidence that they are developing or practicing the exemplary leadership approach.

Over many years than I care to remember, I have been a promoter, deliverer, and funder of these programs, each designed to be better and more effective than the last. Like many of you, I often find myself asking: What‘s next? How can we make it better? And how do we finally solve the complex puzzle of what works in leadership development?

I am acutely aware of the challenge of delivering effective learning, juggling long-standing beliefs about leadership and how people develop, as well as the compromises practitioners must make to deliver what the organization and its leaders are prepared to toler ttolerateif we found the nirvana of leadership development, we would still have a job to convince both participants and organizations to get on board, disregard what they think they already know, and make the systemic changes in the organization needed for good leadership to flourish.

I do not claim to have the answers we are all seeking, but I want to share some of the key lessons I have learned along the way. I hope that by identifying persistent challenges and sharing emerging ideas, we can collectively advance our practice and make a meaningful impact.

Where it all began, early lessons in Leadership Development
In 1999, as a newly promoted Training Manager, I partnered with a director to design an “Intro to Management” program. The director, armed with their Diploma in Management Studies (DMS), proudly called themselves a “theorist” (back when we still thought learning styles were a thing), insisteinsistinge fill the training with models and theor etheoriesgh some magic that I was yet to understand, this would turn participants into great managers and future lead rs. My suggestion to include reflection and practical exercises was dismissed because the director assumed that people would find it uncomfortable, mainly because they avoided self-examination and were uneasy with the vulnerability of trying new things in front of others.

This experience had a happy ending when the director announced that they were too busy with critical leadership work to spend time developing future leaders. I then set about revising the offer into something practical and potentially helpful for the challenges new managers would face.

This experience highlighted what were to become enduring challenges:

1. A content-driven bias: Where practitioners and stakeholders believe content, including theoretical models, equates to better learning

2. The myth of styles: People equate their personal preferences with better learning and assume that what they feel comfortable with is the same as what is best

3. The fear of vulnerability: Many resist activities that require self-reflection and exposure. These activities, undoubtedly, are more challenging than passive learning, but are surely necessary for personal growth. In the 45th edition of Developing Leaders Quarterly, Zoryna O’Donnell and Theresa Dzendrowskyj wrote about the importance of reflective practice in leadership development. This key leadership capability requires time and discipline to develop.

Learning that Solves Real Problems
It did not take long for me to notice that, despite my well-designed and brilliantly facilitated sessions, leaders were most engaged when we deviated from the topic, bringing in their real-life leadership challenges and seeking advice from those with similar experieexperiencesve mforat real-life problembeingre ‘off top’,;c’ it was early days for me. After acknowledging that this approach might be more beneficial than my insightful exercises, I introduced action learning to my practice, which participants mostly welcomed.

But convincing leaders to openly ask for help was not as easy as I expected, and they struggled with the idea of coaching asking questions instead of just giving advice, a key leadership skill in (almost) everyone’s leadership book.

One action learning experience was an abject failure when the organization attempted to bring together two warring groups into a single action learning set, thinking that if they understood each other’s problems, they would get along better. BetterAct, the distrust between the groups meant that no one was willing to bring a meaningful problem to the table. There are two points here

1. The one-size-fits-all challenge, one solution or intervention can’t be the answer to every problem

2. Establishing psychological safety is vital for effective development. The ability for a facilitator to quickly build rapport, relatedness, and safety in the group is paramount.

The Persistent Appeal of Personality Profiles
Another perplexing moment arose when supporting a leadership team in using Belbin’s Team Roles to build mutual understanding and identify gaps in team strengths The following year they requested ‘we did Belbin last year; this year we’d like to do Myers-Briggs’ despite being unable to articulate any benefits derived from the previous exercise (note: we did not know just how invalid Myers-Briggs is then).

This, along with other experiences, raises essential questions about these profiles (evidence-based or not):

• Are these profiles used as a shortcut to genuine self-reflection? Is being told your style easier than having to reflect on yourself?
• Do they provide a false sense of insight without addressing underlying values, mental models, or motivations? A thorough understanding needs to go below the surface level, which an assessment alone won’t reveal.
• Does it sometimes depend on the context you are ‘being’ in, Matt? A child of the Learning Development Accelerator offers a compelling description of how context matters for both leadership success and the type of leadership required (Leadership Development: The Four Issues That Undermine Traditional Leadership Development Programs, 2024).

There are numerous activities a team leader could use to surface what is essential and drives behavior. Lity to facilitate these types of conversations for the development of leaders. However, I persist often in outsourcing, which leads to these conversations being run by external facilitators.

The ‘It’s too hard, you should help us more’ Phenomenon.
Whilst leadership development aims to build capability, I have often been told that the thinking, reflection, and self-awareness required is too hard, not only by my earlier director Leaders ask us for guidance or simpler models, reflecting the underlying belief that complex problems can be solved easily with the proper advice, learning, or checklist.

In a predictable and stable environment, there may be some merit in simple linear models At introductory levels, people need a starting point However, as we introduce real, unpredictable human beings with multifaceted, changing contexts and environments, what is required for leadership becomes far more complex Nick Petrie, in research from the Centre for Creative Leadership, describes the concept of horizon development. Hori Development is a learning experience that provides expert guidance. Vertical Development is much more about mindset shifts and personal growth, and it must be earned, rather than given. The concept of Development for Development has only increased in prominence since he first wrote about it in 2014.

Leadership needs have become far more complex. Nick Petrie, in research from the Centre for Creative Leadership, describes the concept of horizon development. HoriDevelopmentlopment is the learning that an expert provides. Vertical Development is much more about mindset shifts and personal growth, and it must be earned rather than given. The concept of Development for Development has only increased in prominence since he first wrote about it in 2014.

Leadership growth requires more than just filling a toolbox with new techniques; it demands a shift in how we think, see, and respond to the world around us, and, most importantly, how we can sit with uncomfortableness, complexity, and conflicting perspectives. Effective leaders recognize these challenges not as problems to be solved, but as tasks to be managed. However, rather than grappling with reality, participants in programs become frustrated and disengaged when there is no neat four-box grid to tell them what to do.

Motivation for Developing and for Leadership
The drivers to take part in leadership development are varied. Some individuals want the badge, qualification, or certificate, primarily due to a misguided belief that it will help them secure a promotion. Others wish to develop for the sake of development, but for the other advantages they perceive they will gain. Two senior colleagues recently claimed that people undertake MBAs not for the learning but for the networking. There must be more affordable and straightforward ways to network.

A key challenge in organizations is to inspire genuine commitment to effective leadership development, rather than treating it as a necessary evil for career advancement. While many people are motivated by the intrinsic rewards of making progress and watching colleagues flourish, the system must also expect good leadership. Organizations can support leadership development by valuing leadership ability as equally crucial to technical or professional competence and by creating diverse career pathways that do not require substantial leadership abilities for progression.

Does development get Priority?
Busy leaders with limited time for learning will prioritize developmental opportunities (such as an accountancy update or an industry conference) over leadership development, which is often seen as a nice-to-have or an ‘extra,’ as they confuse their hierarchical leadership position with actual demonstrated leadership behaviors.

This issue of time is persistent. Rational stakeholders' emergencies constantly drive CoC, and it solves challenges to develop their development buffers. This is more than an issue of motivation; it reflects the expectations embedded in organizations and, therefore, our leaders' perception of what is essential.

Unintentionally, Organizations get in the Way of Leadership Development.

Fads in leadership
Whether it's an HBR article the CEO read on the train this morning, a model their executive coach is promoting, or something that worked well in their last organization, the grip of fads, the latest thing, or a model is strong. Many weak or unproven models persist long after they have been discredited. A criticism of many of these models is made brilliantly by Alex Haslam in Zombie Leadership: Dead Ideas That Still Walk Among Us (2022). Haslam describes persistent but flawed ideas about leadership that continue to dominate organizational thinking, even when researchers have debunked them. These models are popular, easy to understand, and are quick wins. Never mind the evidence.

The distraction of definitions
A proper definition of leadership should be simple enough to guide action, not so complex that it delays it. There is a risk that we spend too much time trying to define leadership and crafting frameworks that are too lengthy to be remembered, too generic to be helpful, and too rigid to work in complex situations. Along with the never-ending and largely futile debate about the difference between leadership and management, disproportionate time is spent on building these frameworks when we would be better focused on Developmental Development.

The content of leadership development v. the leadership experience
At some point in every leadership endeavour, someone has asked ‘are the board doing this because it will not work if they don’t? Leadership development often promotes behaviours and approaches that differ from those experienced within the organization. It is challenging for all but the most committed to persist in developing in an environment where their own experience of being led differs significantly from that which is being taught. The perceived validity of the development activity and the motivation to continue learning will almost certainly have a reduced impact in these circumstances.

The system continues to reward individual hero leaders.
Despite espousing values like collaboration, organizations continue to reward and celebrate individual hero leaders with little consideration of the efforts of their teams in their success. Despite the time spent agonizing over definition calibration for promotions and bonus rewards, the behavior looked. This systemic failure to recognize the value of leadership is not only sad butt also often damaging. Haslam claims that it can alienate group members, reduce their willingness to contribute, and damage the very celebrated leaders themselves, inducing narcissism, complacency, and an unwillingness to learn.

Where have I got to in my leadership development practice?
Leadership will always be viewed in organizations as a position in the hierarchy, as much as we endeavour to establish it as a practice and a behaviour. Development must equip our senior leaders to lead effectively, while ensuring that leadership learning is both meaningful and applicable to the realities of our organizations. In particular, our initiatives should encourage leaders to:

• Normalize complexity: Leadership is inherently complex; there are no simple solutions, and context matters. We need to equip leaders to lead effectively in complex environments and stop promoting simplistic, unworkable models.
• Prioritize mindset shifts: Building capacity to think systemically and adaptively, to manage the dynamics of polarizing perspectives, competing priorities, and ever-new challenges, should be integral to our programs.
• Develop leadership ability through leadership development: Leadership development cannot take place in isolation from the environments and people that leaders are attempting to lead. Real-world problems should be incorporated into the learning environment, and participants should expect to be assigned tasks and experiments to carry out as an integral, not optional, part of the development activity.
• Embrace Reflection: Leading is not just about doing; the ability to step back and make sense of experiences is critical. Initiatives need to prioritize developing reflective practice and ensure this is not squeezed in or seen as an optional extra.
• Reframe discomfort as growth: Emphasize that discomfort is a natural reaction to stepping outside one's comfort zone. Accepting uncertainty is often when development happens.