ldp 101: closing the upcoming leadership gap through leadership development programming

1

LDP 101:LDP 101:Closing the Upcoming Leadership Closing the Upcoming Leadership

Gap through Leadership Gap through Leadership Development ProgrammingDevelopment Programming

Megan Brogger, M.A. Katie Olson, M.A., L.P.P.Megan Brogger, M.A. Katie Olson, M.A., L.P.P.

John Fennig, Ph.D., L.P.John Fennig, Ph.D., L.P. DRI ConsultingDRI Consulting

St. Paul, MN St. Paul, MN

2

ContextContext

• Federal Government– 60% of all federal

workers eligible to retire by 2016

– Includes 28% of all senior leaders

– Significant leadership gap exists due to past hiring practices

– Recruitment and retention

• Private Sector– 50 – 75% of senior

management eligible for retirement by 2010*

– 97% report significant leadership gaps*

*Source: HayGroup

3

ContextContext

• Over one-half of organizations have NO succession plan, knowledge transfer plan, replacement strategy

• Existing plans often focus on technical KSAOs

• Fewer focus directly on leadership KSAOS

• Good news about the recession

• Leadership programming is a proven and achievable approach to filling leadership gaps

4

GoalsGoals

• Provide information on best practices in leadership development programming

• Describe successes and challenges in providing leadership programming in a federal government organization, the US Army Corps of Engineers

5

The Client:The Client:United StatesUnited States

Army Corps of EngineersArmy Corps of Engineers(USACE)(USACE)

7

• 1802 West Point 1802 West Point founded - US Military founded - US Military Academy to prepare Academy to prepare engineers for USACEengineers for USACE

USACE HistoryUSACE History

• 1775 Continental 1775 Continental Congress est. Corps Congress est. Corps of Engineersof Engineers

• First task: build First task: build Bunker Hill Bunker Hill fortificationfortification

8


1906 San Francisco 1906 San Francisco earthquakeearthquake

1914 Panama Canal 1914 Panama Canal completioncompletion

9

USACE HistoryUSACE History 1942 Alaska Highway1942 Alaska Highway

1884 Washington 1884 Washington MonumentMonument

10

1936 Flood 1936 Flood Control Act Control Act Recognized Corps Recognized Corps

as federal flood as federal flood control agencycontrol agency


1942 Manhattan 1942 Manhattan ProjectProject Construction of Construction of

production facilitiesproduction facilities

11

1936 Hoover Dam 1936 Hoover Dam completedcompleted


1945 – 1952 1945 – 1952 Reconstruction of Reconstruction of JapanJapan

13

USACEUSACEOrganizationOrganization

HQUSACEHQUSACE

Divisions Divisions (9)(9)

MILCONMILCON(26)(26)

Civil WorksCivil Works(38)(38)

Real EstateReal Estate(33)(33)

OCONUSOCONUS(8)(8)

Districts (45)Districts (45)

SESSES

DistributionDistributionCivilian /MilitaryCivilian /Military

Civilians:Civilians:Uniformed:Uniformed:

32,973 FTE 32,973 FTE 587 Authorized587 Authorized

HQ in DC:HQ in DC:799 /48 799 /48 Division HQ:Division HQ:

861/26861/26

Districts:27,757/259

Who Is USACE?Who Is USACE?

15

US Army Corps of EngineersUS Army Corps of Engineers

• Since the early 1990s, “pockets” within USACE have offered LDPs

• By 2000 about half (N = 20) of the USACE organizations had LDPs

• In 2006, Engineering Requirement that all organizations within USACE would have 4-tiered LDPs

• Since 2001, DRIC has consulted in >20 year-long LDPs in 7 USACE organizations

16

Best Practices (BPs) in Best Practices (BPs) in Leadership Development Leadership Development

Programming Programming

17

Typical ScenarioTypical Scenario

• Shortages at manager, senior manager, direc-tor, and senior leader levels (down 15 – 20%)

• Impact of stimulus package

• Need to develop leaders from employees hired on technical bases

• LDPs seen as ways to

– increase the pool of internal leadership candidates

– reduce gaps in leadership skills

– grow leaders more quickly

18

• Strategy

• Enablers

• Design

• Components

• Content

• Outcomes

The HandoutThe Handout

Handout:- Are we doing this?- Keep as is or make changes?

19

• Business strategy drives the goals, objectives, and content of the LDP

• Organizational needs assessments provide LDP goals and outcomes

• Needs assessments uncover the leadership competencies on which LDPs are based

Best Practices - StrategicBest Practices - Strategic

20

• LDPs are integrated into broader talent management/ workforce development effort

Best Practices - StrategicBest Practices - Strategic

Graphic: SHRM

21

• Senior leaders voice and demonstrate genuine commitment ($$$) to the LDP

• Participation is voluntary

• Selection process is rigorous

• Participants come from across the organization and a variety of disciplines

Best Practices - EnablersBest Practices - Enablers

22

• One size does not fit all; Customize

• Formal program structure

– Use a classroom format– Meet regularly– Establish a curriculum

• Sessions are spaced, not massed

• Formal program provides the structure upon which to hang other components

Best Practices - DesignBest Practices - Design

23

• Use appropriate time spans appropriate to different types of KSAOs

• Components are integrated, cohesive and internally consistent

• Assure transfer of training; Require practice and reporting back; Avoid “one-shot,” stand- alone workshops


24

• Transfer of Training via Action Learning

– Prework

– Training and in-session practice

– Real world practice with on-the-job support

– Reporting back on successes and challenges

– Continued practice

– Utilization assignments


25

• Include both cohort & individual components

• Assess individual leadership style and preference as baseline; Use results for developmental purposes only

• 360 degree surveys, based on org’s leadership competencies are “the most useful element …” in LDPs

– Especially when paired with Individual Action Plans

Best Practices - ComponentsBest Practices - Components

26

• LDP Projects are Win-Win

– Provide opportunities for action learning

– Contribute to organizational outcomes

• Use of External Coaches

• Internal Formally-Structured Mentoring Program


27


• Books and Readings

• Facilitated Discussion of Case Studies

• Rotational/Developmental Assignments

• Structured Reflection – most useful and most disparaged

28

Best Practices - ContentBest Practices - Content

• Content varies across organizations

• Content should be driven by organizational needs assessment

• Will increasingly include strategy, change, work-life balance, and developing others

29


THEN• “Just in case” – broad,

general approach

• Focus on individual leadership

• Transactional leadership

NOW• “Just in time” – relates

to current business environment

• Focus on relationships and interactions

• Transformational & authentic leadership

30


• Relates to org needs & assessment/360 results

• Includes Emotional Intelligence

• Provides training on derailers and how to avoid them

31

• Disposition toward decisiveness and action

• Effects = Whole person, not just the work person

• Increased success of the organization in accomplishing its mission

• Enhanced retention of employees

Best Practices - OutcomesBest Practices - Outcomes

32

• Vary between not having any and $ estimate

• Most common are turnover, professional progress, career trajectory

• Typically, Kirkpatrick’s Levels 1, 2, 3; not 4

• Many orgs are comfortable with informal and qualitative approaches

Best Practices - METRICSBest Practices - METRICS

33

• Require a long-term vision since dividends may not be realized for years.

• Valid and reliable LDP outcome metrics are the wave of the future

Best Practices - METRICSBest Practices - METRICS

34

Questions?Questions?

ldp 101: closing the upcoming leadership gap through leadership development programming

Documents