Top trends in leadership development

A majority of leaders (71%) said they performed work outside of their formal roles, and 59% said that this limits their ability to focus on strategic priorities, according to a report from the American Management Association.

The research took responses from more than 1,200 professionals worldwide and found that 69% of leaders reported spending at least half their time influencing others without direct authority. AMA said this highlighted “a critical shift away from hierarchical management.”

Only 44% of leaders said they felt fully prepared for future role expectations, per the research. This could indicate a failure in leadership development and succession planning, AMA said.

The report revealed “a growing gap between what organizations expect from leaders and the systems designed to support them,” per a press release. 

The research uncovered a critical opportunity in leadership development, Manny Avramidis, president and CEO of AMA, said in the release.

“Leaders are expected to be strategic, yet tactical work increasingly pulls them away from that role. It isn't a failure of leadership; it's a signal to improve organizational design. Leaders best accomplish their goals when they limit the amount of time spent on tasks that can be accomplished by direct reports,” Avramidis said.

In order for organizations to close the gap between the demands placed on leaders and the support they’re given, companies need to reassess how they approach management training, per the report. AMA recommended “redefining delegation as a developmental tool” as well as helping leaders build the skills they need to learn in order to influence without authority. In addition, companies should make role expectations clear and establish shared leadership standards.

“By treating leadership effectiveness as a matter of organizational design — not just individual effort — businesses can build sustainable leadership capacity, strengthen their pipelines, and turn disruption into an advantage,” per the report.

“When leadership starts to bottleneck, it's usually a signal that the system around the role hasn't kept pace," Avramidis said. “Organizations with clearer role boundaries and stronger delegation will balance responsibilities across the team, strengthening the strategic capacity of leadership and supporting the development of others.”

DDI’s Global Leadership Forecast 2025 found that nearly 4 in 10 stressed-out leaders have considered leaving their roles to improve their well-being, signaling the possibility of an imminent leadership exodus.

In addition, a February 2025 report from LHH, a talent solutions provider and global business unit of the Adecco Group, found that 75% of leaders said they need additional support in order to effectively manage their responsibilities.

When I think about leadership development, I go back to my years in the military. One thing the military consistently does well is learning and development. When you are promoted, or even before being promoted, you attend a school that prepares you for the next level. You’re not thrown into a leadership role and told to figure it out. You are trained, coached and equipped before you ever take responsibility for people.

This dynamic is almost completely missing in many organizations. Promotions often happen because someone does their current job well, not because they are prepared to succeed in the next one. 

Someone leaves, and suddenly the conversation becomes, “You perform the best: Do you want the role?” A strong technician becomes a manager. A high-performing employee becomes a supervisor. A reliable team member becomes the next shift lead. But their new role actually requires a completely different skill set — and in most organizations, no one teaches it to them.

An ‘overnight identity shift’

Frankly, one of the most difficult transitions in any organization is moving from front-line employee to front-line leader. You are no longer their co-worker, hang-out partner or drinking buddy. You now set schedules, give guidance, provide direction and hold people accountable

It is an overnight identity shift and it can be extremely difficult to navigate.

New leaders are suddenly expected to handle accommodation and leave conversations, coach employees, address attendance issues, recognize good performance, manage conflict, write documentation, conduct investigations and communicate expectations clearly —  all without ever teaching you how.

Most supervisors are not struggling because they are poor leaders. They are struggling because nobody prepared them to lead.

Leadership training is treated like a one-time event in many organizations: A workshop. A presentation. A seminar. People sit, listen, take notes, and then return to their teams hoping they remember something when a real situation occurs. 

Best practices to develop managers

Leaders do not need long lectures. They need clarity. They need skills. They need confidence. They need short, practical guidance they can use the moment they walk out of the room.

I believe in a blended approach to leadership development, which is why I created a “pathways to leadership excellence” training program. In those sessions, we used scenarios that mirrored actual workplace situations. Leaders worked in small groups, large groups and individually; they practiced public speaking and coaching conversations; they built skills in writing evaluations, disciplining employees, prioritizing tasks effectively and developing ideas for future business opportunities.

We intentionally mixed seating, so leaders worked with people from other departments. We engaged with all kinds of media where it made sense: Videos created internally and externally that reflect our environment and challenges, games to reinforce concepts in different ways, and books providing different perspectives on teamwork and communication. 

We also assigned homework so leaders had to think, practice, and apply what they learned between sessions. Participants wrote book reports to explain what they learned, what stood out and how they planned to apply each concept. 

The goal was not to overwhelm them. The goal was to stretch them, strengthen them, and develop them in ways that actually mattered.

Real examples, real responsibilities, real results

Because the sessions were practical and the concepts were delivered in focused segments, leaders applied what they learned immediately. Over time, they became more confident. Employee relations issues decreased. Conversations improved. Consistency increased. Turnover decreased. Time to hire improved. Performance ratings more accurately reflected individuals' work. 

Leaders across departments began speaking the same language and culture strengthened, because expectations were clear and leaders finally had tools they could rely on. Leaders became empowered.

Our approach worked because leadership development should be continuous and aligned with real responsibilities. Leaders are busy. They do not need long, theoretical workshops. They need straightforward guidance. They need time to practice. They need reinforcement. And they need training that respects the reality of their day.

When we prepare our leaders, we prepare our entire organization. And when we invest in their growth, leadership becomes a strength — not a vulnerability.

Sponsored content

By Hogan Assessments

Most of us have encountered an ineffective leader at one time or another. The common cause? The personality characteristics and behaviors used to identify high potentials are not always what lead to effective performance among leaders. This gap is where most high-potential programs fail.

Conscientiousness, execution focus, ambition and resilience drive early-career success, making high performers seem "leaderlike." But the most senior levels of leadership demand something different: strategic thinking, delegation, building high-performing teams and the ability to lead at a scope in which those early-career strengths can become liabilities.

"High potentials think more of the same will produce results," said Christopher Duffy, managing partner at Hogan Assessments. "Strategic self-awareness is absolutely critical for individuals to make that bridge to doing things in a different manner."

Strategic self-awareness isn't just self-knowledge. It's a form of self-management that involves knowing how to amplify or downplay certain skills based on context and it requires deliberate high-potential development efforts.

This means starting with an honest picture of who someone actually is, not just what they've achieved.

Know who you're developing

Scientifically valid personality assessments are the most reliable foundation for high-potential development because they reveal what performance metrics can't. How does a high potential behave when they're at their best? What motivates them to succeed and what kind of organizational culture will they create? And how do they behave during times of stress or pressure?

Allan Church, cofounder and managing partner at Maestro Consulting and former SVP of global talent management at PepsiCo, found that integrating Hogan assessments with 360-degree feedback transformed the quality of development conversations. Participants reported their experience was 85 percent better than most others they had encountered. "While each Hogan personality assessment provides unique and important information, the power in understanding the relationships across the tools drives the messages home," he said.

Personality data also protect against two common errors in identifying potential: overlooking strong candidates who don't self-promote and advancing charismatic candidates who lack the leadership skills to succeed in strategic roles. "If you can put the assessment as part of the identification process at the front end, it can be a fantastic way to make sure that you're not missing something," Duffy said.

Develop for the destination, not the current role

As leaders advance, ambition, conscientiousness and performance outcomes still matter, of course, but certain skill gaps can quietly undermine someone who might otherwise seem like a sure bet. Interpersonal skills, in particular, become more important as a leader rises through the ranks. Leaders must earn trust from their teams, inspire people and encourage cooperation while driving results. They must also model diplomacy while navigating socially complex situations.

This is where stretch assignments become essential. Crossing business sectors, leading in unfamiliar geographies, or navigating a cross-functional role creates the kind of pressure that reveals whether a high potential is truly ready for the demands of leadership.

“By definition, a stretch assignment should give you stress," said Church. Personality feedback helps people understand their tendencies under stress before they're in the middle of it.

The goal isn't to convert every high potential into something they're not. A high potential with lower social energy can still build a reputation as a connected leader by being intentional about visibility, cross-departmental relationships and how they solicit and act on feedback.

Development creates awareness of what effective leadership looks like at the next level and it provides high potentials with a path to the strategic self-awareness that can take them there.

Make it a program, not an event

"The most effective component of the high-potential program is making sure we have a clear plan for what to do next with these individuals and really help them prepare for that destination role," Duffy said. He encourages organizations to think along a three- to five-year horizon, with a transparent path for advancement that reduces turnover at senior levels.

Ongoing coaching is central to that plan. Coaching helps high potentials examine what has worked in the past and think differently about what leadership requires going forward. Peer cohorts can reinforce that shift, replacing a competitive dynamic with mutual investment in each other's development.

The organizations that develop high potentials most effectively share one orientation: they treat the program as preparation for a future role, not recognition for past performance. That distinction changes everything about what gets measured, what gets coached and what gets rewarded.

Only 30% of front-line supervisors said they were placed into their role based on supervisory skills, experience as a supervisor or because they began their career as a supervisor, according to recent data from Gallup.

Sixty-five percent of front-line supervisors said they obtained their position “based on performance or years of experience in a front-line role.” Supervisors who obtained their roles this way are less engaged (31%) than peers who got their roles through supervisory skills, experience as a supervisor, or who began their career as a supervisor (42%).

Front-line supervisors who have been through training that focused on becoming a better supervisor in the past year are 79% more likely to be engaged, per Gallup. The report also said they were 19% less likely “to feel burned out at work very often or always, and 11% less likely to be actively looking or watching for a new job.”

In explaining the data, Gallup cited The Peter Principle, a concept introduced by Laurence Peter and Raymond Hull in 1969. The idea suggests that employees tend to “rise to a level of respective incompetence,” being promoted “until their performance declines,” the report said. Employers often leave those workers in place “instead of moving them into roles that better use their talents.”

The result, said Gallup, is that management and leadership roles get filled with people “whose past success does not align with the demands of managing a team.”

While front-line supervisors in industries such as manufacturing, healthcare and retail are promoted based on individual performance or experience as front-line workers, Gallup cited data from the National Bureau of Economic Research, which found a 7.5% decline in subordinates’ sales performance “when organizations promoted high-performing sales representatives to managerial roles.”

Supervisor engagement also influences employees who report to them, per Gallup’s research, which found that managers’ “engagement, effectiveness, and natural talents account for at least 70% of the variance in team-level engagement,” even when taking into account other factors. Meanwhile, U.S. front-line employees already experience lower levels of engagement (26%) than the U.S. workforce broadly (32%).

Gallup found that less than half of front-line supervisors (45%) said they had participated in supervisor training or education in the past year, and another 32% said they had that kind of training, but not in the past year. A further 23% said they’d never taken part in that kind of training.

In order to mitigate the effects of the Peter Principle, Gallup suggested hiring and promoting workers based on supervisory talent instead of only basing the decisions on individual performance or experience in a role.

“A meta-analysis of 136 studies in which structured interviews and assessments were administered to 14,597 managers found that hiring based on managerial talent increased sales or revenue by 21% per manager and profit by 32% per manager,” Gallup said.

People leader roles are in need of “a deliberate redesign,” according to an analysis from global HR research and advisory firm McLean & Co.

In its current iteration, the demands of people leader roles, coupled with increasing complexity, evolving employee expectations and continuous change, are pushing individuals to an unsustainable point, research found. 

Nearly 3 in 4 of leaders said that leadership skill sets will need to change completely or almost completely to adapt to the future of work in 2030, and 74% of organizations find it challenging to develop effective people leaders, according to previous surveys by McLean & Co.

“People leaders are carrying a workload that has expanded far beyond what the role was ever designed to support,” Lexi Hambides, director of HR research and advisory services at McLean & Co., said in a statement. “They are expected to coach, inspire, drive strategy, and support wellbeing while navigating constant disruption.”

Given the fast adoption of artificial intelligence into the workplace and evolving worker expectations, “leadership can’t be defined the way it once was,” Hambides said. Even the most capable leaders, she said, are being overwhelmed. 

To that end, nearly 8 in 10 HR decision-makers said the CHRO role is expanding or increasing in importance, according to a November DSG Global report.

“Organizations that rethink the role now will be far better positioned to build resilient teams, strong cultures, and future-ready leaders,” Hambides said. 

The McLean & Co. research “calls for a fundamental redesign of the role to enable leaders to focus on what drives the greatest impact: enabling people, fostering resilience, and translating strategy into meaningful action.” That can involve clarifying the purpose of the role, redesigning workloads to consider “visible and invisible responsibilities,” matching HR programs with leader expectations and using technology to give leaders more time for higher-value work. 

“Without a reimagined approach, organizations risk losing the very leaders they rely on to navigate the future,” the research warns. 

The challenges facing leaders have been repeatedly documented. For example, two-thirds of managers said they struggle with heavy workloads, according to a January Top Workplaces report. Likewise, C-suite executives said they are experiencing a “crisis of confidence” as they face higher levels of stress, burnout and turnover, according to a February LHH report. 

As a result, “high-potential employees are increasingly opting out of leadership roles due to stress and limited reward,” McLean & Co. found.

Although most organizations offer a manager development program, more than 90% say they lack time to participate, according to a report from the Association for Talent Development.

In addition, 63% said being a manager is more difficult than they anticipated, and more than half said their organization provided little or no training to prepare, the report found.

“In order to perform at the highest level, managers need training that equips them with the skills to succeed and to make sure their employees succeed,” ATD reported.

In a survey of 409 talent development professionals, respondents said it’s important for their managers to be proficient in communication, performance management and employee feedback. In particular, providing feedback was a major focal point of manager development training, the survey found.

While organizations used different training methods and techniques, high-performing organizations were more likely to use pre- and post-training activities, as well as bite-sized learning options. 

Among the 53% that offered post-training activities, they most commonly provided access to a resource library on manager skills. These libraries tended to include articles, job aids, videos and other tools to reinforce learning.

In addition, 62% of organizations said they use coaching or mentorship when training managers to bolster skills, the report found.

Since manager performance is tied to team performance, managers need the right people management skills to lead their teams. However, managers may not have these skills and need leadership training to succeed, particularly for conflict management, culture building and ethical decision-making, various studies have shown.

Training can also bolster engagement, which has fallen dramatically among managers, especially for women and those under age 35, according to a Gallup report. In particular, Gallup suggested teaching managers how to be better coaches — and to receive coaching themselves. Manager training improved manager thriving, Gallup found, which grew even more if a manager had someone to encourage their ongoing development.