It is axiomatic that superior organizations have superior leaders. Yet broadly skilled leaders are in short supply. The time-honored way of learning one's technical specialty, then somehow making the transition into supervision, is not a reliable method for producing adequately trained staff. Most organizations need a vigorous and deliberate way to improve the skills of supervisors, managers, and executives. They need a leadership development program (LDP). Although costly, an LDP is a wise investment for a compelling reason: well-led organizations tend to attract quality applicants, produce satisfied employees, incur less unwanted turnover, engender loyal customers, and yield impressive financial returns.

It is fair, however, to raise a basic policy question in deciding how to ensure that the organization is leadership-- ready: Buy or build? Under the "buy" approach, the organization relies upon recruiting and selecting talented leaders from outside. This is a fast way to get skilled personnel with fresh ideas and obviates the need for erecting an expensive internal development program. The major disadvantages of not developing from within are, on one hand, a likely decrease in morale for those bypassed and, on the other, temporary dips in productivity while new leaders "learn the ropes. " In addition, unionized organizations may encounter additional resistance.

The prime advantage of building leadership talent, besides eliminating the disadvantages of going outside, is twofold. First, the organization gets to groom the next generation in line with its culture and strategic agenda. Second, the organization has greater control over the supply of leaders with the requisite skills, making strategic implementation faster.

The need for talented leaders exists, and, on balance, it appears that the benefits outweigh the costs of creating an LDP within the organization. The following plan provides an overview and a detailed outline of the nine tasks essential to creating a leadership development program that will help current and future leaders reach their potential in the service of organizational goals.1

Overall Approach

A comprehensive LDP requires a careful selection of participants from the applicant pool, adequate funding, and dedicated administrators and development staff. Beyond these factors, the symbolic aspects of leadership need attention (e.g., awards ceremonies, distinguished leaders' speakers' series, and so forth). Invent or use existing methods to visibly reward those current and aspiring leaders who behave in accord with officially designated competencies.

Equally important, the organization should show its commitment to the program by intolerance of poor leaders. Ineffective program participants and current leaders who are incapable or unwilling to improve despite organizational support should be removed. Dramatic acts demonstrate the real (versus espoused) values around leadership.

Next, give potential leaders challenging opportunities early in their careers, ideally in their 20s and 30s. They should be nurtured and should have enough responsibility to make an impact and significant mistakes. Noble failures are not punished. Indeed, the wise organization tries to accelerate its mistakes, thereby increasing its rate of learning.

Mistakes are tolerated, provided that they are made in service to the organization and that participants learn from those mistakes. Young leaders receive targeted training and development based on individual needs. Older leaders receive broadening experiences and educational opportunities. Finally, the organization rewards the developers of the next generation of leaders. Mentors are highly valued and rewarded.

Beyond this general approach, a leadership development program involves the nine major tasks described here.

Task 1. Devise Program Selection Criteria

Criteria for program selection should be defined. Each strategic business unit (SBU) or support office might answer this question slightly differently, based on its unit-specific strategy, goals, and current and future leadership needs.

General selection criteria can be established beyond specific SBU needs. Find a good match between immediate and future role demands and the applicant's personality. Admittedly, this is easier said than done, owing to inconsistent findings over decades of earnest research. Still, despite the situational contingencies that determine the traits necessary to lead in a particular circumstance, several traits appear to correlate with leadership effectiveness in most situations.

The following list of traits is not exhaustive but can be used as part of the checklist of selection criteria. Alternatively, it can be employed as a starting point for discussion within the organization. If not these characteristics, then which leadership traits does the organization consider fundamental? Which traits, upon entering the program, are likely to accelerate skill acquisition?

Desire. Wants to lead; wants to get things done through other people; wants to have an impact. (Perhaps, this should be the most heavily weighted variable.) Purpose. Has vision and goals; wants to achieve something, to accomplish things.

Confidence. Believes she or he can make a difference but isn't grandiose. Assertiveness. Is willing to assert self and to compete, without becoming unduly upset.

Psychological fitness. Has insight and feels comfort with self; is empathic toward others and open to feedback. Centeredness. Has sufficient impulse control; stays focused under pressure.

Energy. Has the physical stamina to do lots of things and to work long hours.

General intelligence. Possesses average or slightly above-average general intelligence (e.g., logical, linguistic, mathematical, and spatial intelligence, relative to subordinates and sufficient for the occupation).

General intelligence and other characteristics are necessary but not sufficient to guarantee leadership success. Context and technical skills matter, to say nothing of motivation. Still, the applicant who possesses these eight traits has met one threshold test for becoming a leader.

Other program selection criteria might include:

Strategic direction. Where is the organization going, and what type of skills does it need to get there? For example, a marketing unit may need staff with an aesthetic sense, which might suggest recruiting and selecting candidates for the program from nonbusiness backgrounds.

A demographic diversity goal.

Many organizations see a respect for diversity as a real need, in that women and minorities tend to be concentrated in the lower salary levels.

Technical skills. What are some basic, foundational technical skills that are required to be a good leader within the organization? Some organizations insist that the candidate first possess solid technical expertise before earning the right to manage others. Performance appraisal data might aid in this assessment.

Task 2. Define Leadership Competencies

Identifying the critical leadership competencies that correlate with organizational effectiveness tells us what leadership skills are needed. Some organizations use the generic leadership competencies found in theory; others build their own competencies; and some derive competencies from the organization's mission statement and core values. The exact competency set may vary by level-supervisor, manager, or executive-and organizational unit. However, most organizations find that foundational competencies apply in many situations and therefore can be used in the same developmental activities.

Researchers are offering fresh ideas of what makes a good leader. As a distinct competency, moral leadership at work is attracting attention.2 Why? Organizations are better off if they behave ethically. Most employees come to the organization with some understanding of ethical values and some attraction to these values. The aspiring and current leader should be taught how to use all five bases3 of his or her power to reinforce ethical values.

We should recognize that leaders have a degree of influence over their employees, and they should use it to create a better society. Moral leadership is not foreign to many organizations. It aligns with many mission statements and core values, such as integrity, human growth at work, and stewardship.

A degree of realism is needed here. Although it is possible for a leader to Influence the ethical development of her or his employees, we should not expect significant change. Advancing the most abstract values will avoid cultural bias and organizational irrelevancy. A moral leadership competency might include these values and behaviors4:

* Compassion.

* Willingness to help others.

* Truthfulness, including not lying by omission.

* Avoiding gossip and political behavior designed to advance a personal agenda. Also, not attempting to gain an unfair advantage over coworkers that does little, if anything, to further the legitimate organizational goals.

* Fairness. Leadership that promotes equality between genders, races, and hierarchical and occupational levels.

* Repudiation of destructive competition.

* Tolerance for diverse views.

Task 3. Establish an Application Process

The program application procedure should be simple, fair, and accurate. It should be a three-step process: 1) advertise the program; 2) evaluate applicants' suitability; and 3) inform them of the decision.

Advertise the program. Here are some policy questions the organization needs to address in choosing the general selection criteria:

Length of service, status, and standing.

For example, longer than 24 months as a regular, full-time employee and acceptable performance appraisal ratings. Occupations. Where will the predicted shortages be that are due, for example, to resignations and retirements over the next few years?

Grade-level categories. For instance, those at or under a certain grade level enter a first-line supervisor track, while those at the highest grade levels enter an upper management track.

Location. Where does the program reside? Perhaps, the organization could have a regional and a headquarters program.

Specific experience requirements. For example, two years as a brand-manager assistant.

Specific educational requirements. For example, 12 semester-hours of management credits.

Implementation of leadership skills. Likelihood of having an opportunity to lead within a reasonable time after graduating from the program, given the organization's workforce trends and strategic directions.

Commitment to the organization. A willingness to meet requirements, for example, to remain for a given length of time or to relocate at the organization's discretion in order to fill a management position. Assess applicants. Use the eight leadership traits noted above (in Task 1) and any other traits or criteria assumed to correlate with leadership ability in developing an assessment protocol for program applicants. This protocol could involve:

* A limited number of essay questions based on the eight traits.

* A limited number of essay questions concerning previous, verifiable leadership experiences. These answers may possibly be the best predictors of success.

* Standardized tests based on the eight traits.5

* Leader, peer, and subordinate, if any, ratings of applicant's potential. For existing leaders, a 360-degree leadership survey can be a piece of the application. Leader aspirants could use the same survey.

* Technical knowledge. The level of such knowledge can usually be gleaned from performance appraisals within a person's occupation. If the individual wishes to lead in an area outside her or his current occupation, this criterion may be waived.

* A concise biographical information blank (work history, formal education, and training).

* Personal interview with open-ended, structured questions based on the resuits of the above data collection efforts.

Notify applicants. Notification is a crucial but often overlooked job. Prompt notification is one way in which applicants judge the quality of an organization; don't jeopardize your standing with the people who are interested in working with you. For those individuals not chosen, a feedback session is advised, at which the LDP administrator explains the reasons for the decision and gives suggestions for what the applicant might do to improve her or his chances for future participation.

Task 4. Assess Current Leadership Skills

Craft valid, reliable, and efficient ways of measuring participants' current leadership styles, tied to competency criteria. Performance appraisals and 360-degree leadership surveys are good sources of data. The assessment data collected during application also can be used. The individual's and others' assessments of his or her leadership traits, for instance, could offer insights into the participant's style and motivation level.

Assessment data should be analyzed and packaged by an LDP staff member and fed back to the participant. These data will give targeted information to assist the participant in making an action plan, and aggregated results will help in devising development activities for all participants.

Assessment centers are a popular way of giving participants a multifaceted portrait of their leadership style and potential. The typical center puts candidates through two or more days of intensive activities that aid in evaluating their planning, organizing, decisionmaking, and leadership abilities. Trained observers rate performance on these simulations and exercises. Assessment centers provide a valid measure of leadership, a nuanced picture of the participants' styles.6

Larger organizations usually favor assessment centers, whose high volume of participation means that per-unit cost declines. Still, a smaller organization can offer an abbreviated version, targeting a few critical competencies. Allowing the organization's executives to help design exercises and assess others' performance will enhance their own leadership styles. Owing to its intensity of activity, an assessment center will afford accuracy, depth of understanding, and participant commitment to the action plan. Such a center makes a powerful statement about an organization's intention to build an excellent organization through its leadership.

Task 5. Provide Developmental Activities

Offer a set of measurable, challenging, and time-bounded developmental activities for participants. An LDP's assumption that (almost) all motivated participants can become effective leaders within three to five years requires an accurate assessment of skill needs, focused development, and consistent organizational support. Using the survey and other assessment data, participants each prepare a detailed individual development plan (IDP) and review it with an LDP administrator, supervisors, and organizational mentors.

IDPs capture participants' specific strengths and areas of needed improvement, allowing them to focus on their greatest needs while capitalizing on their strengths. A one to three year time frame allows for taking plenty of small, deliberate steps that will add up. Each IDP details any number of time-- bounded activities, like classroom training, rotational assignments, committee work, and/or directed readings.

Each participant takes primary responsibility for his or her own learning. An IDP is a practical way for this to happen. It is checked frequently and revised, as needed, with input from the program administrator, supervisor, and mentor. At various intervals, formal evaluation occurs, usually through readministration of the 360-degree leadership survey and performance appraisals. Resurveying every six to 12 months yields useful data with which to affirm growth and revise action plans.

Leadership development typically occurs in three related areas: technical, conceptual, and interpersonal.

Technical. Technical training enhances the skills needed to perform the work unit's tasks and/or to oversee the work of others. Technical skills are most important at the lower levels of leadership, where leaders are closest to the work. The easiest developmental task to accomplish, it usually involves a combination of traditional classroom training-most frequently covering just in time and OJT.

Conceptual. Here, the focus is on teaching the leader how to think in a more abstract and critical fashion. This is harder to achieve than technical training but still eminently possible. Conceptual leadership competencies that might be used for assessment include creativity, strategic thinking, and decisiveness. Of course, these competencies are not immediately relevant to all occupations and levels of leadership.

The method for developing conceptual skills may target specific areas or may be more general. Nevertheless, every participant should ensure that her or his skill needs receive sufficient attention. Some common methods are: business games; undergraduate or graduate courses; certificate and degree programs; simulations; critical-thinking training; directed readings; writing articles for publication; making presentations at professional conferences; doing rotational or taskforce assignments; attending seminars, workshops, and focused meetings with consultants and other subject-matter experts; being mentored; mentoring others; and "shadowing" executives.

Interpersonal. The ability to work effectively with other people is an essential determinant of leadership success. Honing interpersonal skills is, however, the most challenging of the three leadership development categories. Still, success is achievable. Most developmental methods involve experiential learning, or learning by doing, though the learning is reinforced by a cognitive understanding of theory. Common methods are:

* Role playing, with observer feedback.

* Role playing, with video feedback and observer feedback.

* Participating in organization development (OD) projects with goals related to the participant's specific skill needs.

* Receiving coaching and counseling from an OD consultant.

* Engaging in case analyses with other program participants.

* Rotating jobs that entail managerial tasks, with frequent feedback.

* Being mentored.

* Receiving special assignments that require high levels of interpersonal interaction.

* Shadowing executives.

* Being evaluated by an assessment center, an outside observer.

* Attending interpersonal skill workshops, for example, through the National Training Laboratory's Human Interaction Program or the federal government's Federal Executive Institute or Management Development Centers under the direction of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

* Maintaining a learning journal.

* Providing coaching and counseling to peers within the program.

* Attending "interpersonal forums" with other program, participants to discuss progress and problems.

* Attending feedback-intensive programs like the Center for Creative Leadership's Leadership Development Program.

Task 6. Align Structures to Reinforce the Program

Successful LDPs find ways to tie desired leader behavior to the organizations formal personnel systems. Tie-in methods might include:

* Writing position descriptions that capture aspects of required leader behavior as critical success factors.

* Designing selection systems that assign heavy weight to past leadership successes and to clear potential for leadership.

* Including leadership as the key element in the leader's performance appraisal.

* Providing balanced feedback on a routine basis.

* Creating meaningful reward programs for effective leaders.

* Providing frequent and timely reinforcement of desired behavior.

* Withholding rewards from and removing leaders who are not performing or are demonstrating little motivation.

Task 7. Develop Leaders in Context

As far as possible, leadership development should occur on the job, not away from it. Leaders get things done through others. Leadership is essentially a transaction between a leader and his or her followers. It makes sense to design developmental programs that attend to the transactional context within which the leader resides.

For instance, empowered groups like self-directed work teams distribute the leadership function, rather than relying on one formally designated person. Increasingly, teams are held accountable to each other via performance appraisals and customer satisfaction surveys of each other's timeliness, quality, and so forth. The mature team recognizes that it shares the responsibility for its reputation with its leader. We can increase the developmental yield by helping leaders and their groups to grow.

Team-based leadership development reflects modern thinking about leadership. This model downplays the ancient understanding of leadership as the dominance of one over many. We step away from teaching leaders how to make decisions by themselves, toward developing the capacity of people to maintain themselves within a social setting and achieve group goals.

The leader alone is not responsible for building an effective organization. Development must occur within the group because the view of the leader as the person with all the answers is challenged by the reality that individual team members at all levels make continuous decisions. Further, in a multicultural world, it is logical that any one leader cannot have all the answers. Even the most cosmopolitan and seasoned person has limits to her/his ability to know other groups, other cultures, and other markets.

Education and training within a group is practical because it is immediately applied within the leader's setting. For instance, he/she does not deal with difficult people in the abstract but deals with a specific difficult member of his/her current team. In this respect, group-based development is a practical, experiential method of learning.

How might an organization conduct leader and group development? Team building is a powerful method. In team building-widely used to improve a work group's effectiveness and job satisfaction-the team examines its current performance in several areas. The leader plays an important role in the process, as he or she is often the principal, though by no means the only, actor in the group.

During a team-building intervention, members, with the help of an outside facilitator, examine their functioning compared with that of an ideal, highperforming team.

The goal is to replace ineffective behavior with more productive methods of working together. Considerable research7 has found that high-performing teams share certain elements:

* Interdependence and commitment to goals.

* Effective communication of ideas and feelings.

* Quality decision making and problem solving.

* Relevant technical expertise.

* Ability to manage conflicts with a minimal amount of tension.

* Optimal level of social cohesion.

* Ability and willingness to challenge performance norms.

* Active participation and distribution of leadership.

* A supportive leader who uses power appropriately.

In developing each of these elements, the group reviews its own behavior and often finds more effective ways of working. We could argue that the leader's first responsibility is to create a high-performing team because teams are fundamental units with critical leverage points for improving the overall enterprise.

Like individual development, team building is most effective when carried out at intervals over a period of time, say, at one session per month for 12 months. One-time team-building interventions usually are not effective, given the tendency of groups to revert to type soon after the initial enthusiasm wanes. However, because the group often concentrates on specific issues, we tend not to see productivity slippage because of the time we spend away from the job. Real work gets accomplished within the team-building session itself. The investment produces fast returns.

In addition to team building with a leader and her/his intact work group, as already described, the organization also may wish to conduct many other of the developmental activities listed in Task 5 with the leader and the intact team. In many instances, these activities lend themselves better to working with the team as a whole than to the leader's "going it alone."

Conceptual skills like thinking strategically and entrepreneurially can be directed at the work team, especially when implementation becomes the real test of the usefulness of learning something new. Interpersonal skills such as resolving differences and effectively communicating are best taught in groups.

Finally, although they do not involve working with the team as a whole, peer team-building interventions are a useful developmental activity. Peer groups can tackle special, organization-wide projects, with a facilitator assisting them to enhance their leadership and team-- member skills while they solve business problems. Moreover, the cohesion generated by this type of learning makes it easier for the leaders to collaborate on any number of initiatives and projects that go beyond their immediate relationship. In this way, peer team building has a substantial, albeit indirect, impact on organizational effectiveness.

Task 8. Plan for the Next Generation of Leaders

Assuming that the organization chooses to build its talent pool, the leadership succession plan becomes a central part of the development process. In a sense, an LDP and a leadership succession plan are synonymous.

One distinguishing feature is that, while an LDP is a specific program for developing individual leaders, succession planning takes into account the aggregate of leadership development needs, the activities that address these needs, and the measurement of leadership readiness across the organization. Succession planning takes a broader, longer-range view of future managerial needs and resources.8

The LDP should fit within the organization's strategic goals; after all, organizational directions determine current and future leadership needs. The succession plan should ensure that an adequate supply of capable leaders is available to carry out strategic intent throughout the organization.

The succession planning process entails several steps designed to develop leadership talent:

* Assessment of LDP applicants' or participants' current leadership potential and skills. Considers a range of biographical data (career progress, education, interests, realistic career aspirations, and so on).

* Appraisal of leadership behavior using formal appraisal systems and surveys. This step answers the question, in the aggregate: "How well led is this organization?"

* Determination of future management and leadership needs through forecasting and strategic planning.

* Definition of leadership requirements for the near future, as expressed in qualitative terms for various organizational levels. The executive committee must review this document carefully and reach an agreement on the numbers and types of leaders needed.

* Specification of actions for training and developing categories of LDP participants (methods noted in Task 5). Specification usually involves a discussion about the wisdom of "fast-- tracking" participants. Every organization must weigh the costs and benefits of such an approach.

* Creation of a measurement system for summarizing developmental progress and overall organizational leadership readiness.

* Actions to meet immediate needs for leaders.

* Modifications in the program to manage surpluses of leaders.

Ultimately, the assessment of leadership potential and readiness remains a line-management responsibility. The succession planning process must be directed by the organization's leaders, not the human resource staff, though staff may administer the plan under the line's direction.

Task 9. Evaluate the Leadership Development Program

The organization's executives and program designers should define the exact nature and scope of the evaluation, based on the program goals. Furthermore, because an evaluation requires time and expertise, the decision to conduct one at any level should be based on resource availability.

Answering the question "How well is the program working?" requires clear the program goals. Without clear goals, the program is unlikely to succeed, and its degree of success is impossible to measure. From clear goals, we can derive the potential for evaluating the LDP on five levels: reaction (Level 1), knowledge and skill transfer (Level 2), on-site behavioral change (Level 3), business impact (Level 4), and monetary return on investment (Level 5).

Data needed at each level will influence the kinds of program activities conducted. A well-planned evaluation minimizes the burden by building-in practical and unobtrusive ways of gathering data. Evaluation begins at the very beginning of the program design, not at the end.

Generally, each succeeding level of evaluation increases in rigor and cost. It is financially prudent, therefore, to consider the program's success criteria. If success is primarily measured by satisfied participants who assert their intention to apply what they have learned, a Level-1 evaluation will suffice. Conversely, if the program must pay its way to stay alive, we should determine return on investment by tabulating and subtracting program costs from such bottom-line indicators as revenue enhancement or cost savings.

Here are some general suggestions for evaluating an LDP:

Make the evaluation robust,

given the importance and cost of an LDP. As each level builds upon the one below it, collect data on Levels I through 4. Information on participant reactions, knowledge and skill acquired, on-site application, and business impact helps us to understand and explain Level 5, monetary return on investment.

Clearly state the goals and intended audience for each developmental activity clearly. Measuring return on investment (ROI) revolves around two goals, reducing costs and increasing desired impact. For this purpose, leadership development goals should refer back to one or both of these primary objectives. In addition, we can cite nonmonetary outcomes like increased job satisfaction from pre-post climate surveys, and fewer grievances or less unwanted turnover by tracking personnel records.

Gather baseline data for participants and comparison groups.

Although it is tempting to forgo compiling baseline data, resist the temptation. The ability to show before-and-after change is a powerful argument that training has made a difference, especially when a control group exists that did not receive the training.

Use a control group, and, if possible, randomly assign people to training or no-training conditions. To avoid being accused of turning the organization into a laboratory, refer to the control group as the "comparison group! Comparison groups may, at some point, become participants in the program. If so, the study can be explained to the organization as a "lagged participation" evaluation. In the ideal situation, the organization could randomly assign leaders to the participant and comparison groups to avoid the danger of biasing the results by choosing "winners!

In the "real world," choosing the most qualified candidates might make perfect sense. If we want to, we can use judgment rather than random assignment to determine who is in the initial participant and comparison conditions. This may be especially important to ensure that an adequate number of women and minorities are included in the program. Gather a sufficient sample size, and attempt to get representative participants for the study to permit generalization, at least to the extent of the strata included in the study, organizationwide. Initially, the organization might identify three levels: supervisors, middle managers, and upper managers.

Calculate costs and benefits over the shelf life of the program. That is, estimate how many times the program will run, and subtract the corresponding estimated cost from the projected future benefit. (Some organizations prefer to include an inflation factor to enhance precision.)

Consider using trend-line data to isolate the effects of training. Use past data to predict future trends, then compare these with the actual performance after training. Note the gap in the two trend lines, and attribute this gap to the effects of training. This is an inexpensive and intuitive method, but be careful. The result may be an inaccurate attribution because post-training changes may have been caused by something other than training. Past is not always a good predictor of future. However, as one indication of the program's effectiveness, it is a reasonable method to use.

Use regression analysis, a statistical method that shows the relationship between two or more variables. To use this technique, specify all of the potential independent and dependent variables likely to influence the desired outcome. Examples of independent variables include the amount of the budget, supervisory style, and the skill level of workers.

Dependent variables (those that are acted upon) might include sales, revenue, profit, scrap rate, cost savings, and turnover. We are looking for a correlation between the independent and dependent variables. As an example, assume that leaders have been taught how to improve quality. We later find that scrap rate declines. We can begin to build a case that training made the difference-especially if we do not see a similar downward movement in scrap rate within the comparison group, which did not receive the training.

Measure quality with a customer satisfaction index. Record the difference in customer satisfaction before and after training for the participant and comparison groups. Next, correlate customer satisfaction to sales. Customer satisfaction information is hard data, in the sense that it is part of the unit-profit contribution. Customer satisfaction data are a good metric in organizations that use a standardized, valid instrument like the American Customer Satisfaction Index Rating, or Gallup, or Schulman, Roncas, Bucuvalas, Incorporated (SRBI). These instruments may be useful, assuming that we can isolate the participants' contribution to these indices. This is yet another reason to use a comparison group.

Consider employee grievances.

Assume that leaders have been trained in how to diffuse conflict. After training, have managers and HR staff calculate the average cost of a grievance award, plus the labor cost of time spent by the organization in processing the claim, plus external legal fees, to arrive at the unit cost of one grievance. Then, calculate the before-and-after change in the number of grievances filed, and annualize the difference to arrive at ROI-minus the cost of the training itself, of course.

A final thought on evaluating an LDP: Don't forget the intangible benefits of training. By "intangible benefits," we mean the important indicators that do not tie directly in to monetary outcomes: increased job satisfaction, improved communication and teamwork, and fewer complaints. Calculating these benefits can be a challenge; nonetheless, even here the organization may be able to measure financial returns.

Employee Potential

It often is noted that an organization's only distinctive competence is its employees. But coordinated effort is needed to convert employee potential into positive outcomes. Leadership at every level is the necessary catalyst. High-performing organizations are led by technically, conceptually, and interpersonally skilled individuals who have the ability to empower and guide employee behavior.

Leadership is a teachable skill, albeit a difficult and time-consuming one to learn. Also, an internally built and administered LDP is a large undertaking, especially when the program comprises the nine steps described here. However, the organizational benefits can be substantial, far outweighing the costs. Systematic leadership development is a strategic choice, representing a longterm investment in an organization's future and that of its employees.