Develop leaders for the future,
Fact based approach
Dr. Mark van Dongen GPHR
HR Director Global Business Integration
Crist...
Agenda
Agenda:
1. An integrated model
2. From HR roadmap to the HEART model of MD
3. MD audits in three global FT 500 comp...
An integrated model
• Succession and talent management has moved to the forefront of the
agenda’s of CEO’s worldwide
• ‘Wa...
Challenges?
• The field of HR is a not a science in itself, it is an amalgamation of
different disciplines.
• Fragmented e...
What is Talent?
A talent is an individual, who generates a disproportional higher
value compared to the cost to employ the...
Talent
For ease of discussion, talent is split out in two ways:
1.

Deep talent; individual value creators who do not have...
What is leadership
Leadership is defined as the ability to exert a conscious influence
on the behavior of another person i...
Talent and leadership talent
Leader-talents are defined as those who:
1. Have the potential (intellectually) to develop th...
From process to audit tool and standardized company profile

Defining and detecting
talents
Phase based
development of tal...
Empirical data from a group of companies
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

7.

Results on talent defining and detecting
talent

32.4% state their organization have no adequate d...
HR and MD
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.

6.
7.

In 97.1% of companies HR leads MD process,
Only in 23.5 % is the MD (leadership developm...
Organizational prerequisites
• Informal talent networks in only 14.7%;
• Changing preferences of generations, taken into a...
Reviewing performance versus the model
of Global Companies
The Audit list items
The 16 key elements of the MD model were:
1. Talent is defined
2. Values of the company and the indiv...
Empirical results; Audited companies

16
Empirical results; Audited companies

17
Empirical results; Audited companies
Empirical results; Audited companies

TRENDS

18
Conclusion
Companies believe MD provides a competitive advantage, it is difficult to
obtain data utilizing self-surveys, ...
Conclusions 2
Many companies do not hold leaders accountable for development of their
talents,
Companies do not reward for...
Consequences
for HR
•

Though HR is accountable for MD, they need substantial improvement
to increase knowledge

– Situati...
Develop leaders for the future,
Fact based approach
Dr. Mark van Dongen
HR Director Global Business Integration
Cristal, J...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Leadership Development: A Facts Based Approach to Improve Your Process, Mark Van Donge

1,078 views

Published on

Developing leaders for the future of our companies seems something all companies are compelled to do. Though that might be the case, in his research Mark found that most companies are far away from a professional development of their leaders. In this presentation Mark will give an overview of his findings, based on an integrated model of how to develop leaders. He supports this with handouts of an audit model that allows you to review your company’s leadership development process. With the knowledge shared and the handout, you are able to make a first review of your own process and work towards further improvements.

This presentation was used at HR Summit and Expo 2013 www.hrsummitexpo.com

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,078
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
8
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
40
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Leadership Development: A Facts Based Approach to Improve Your Process, Mark Van Donge

  1. 1. Develop leaders for the future, Fact based approach Dr. Mark van Dongen GPHR HR Director Global Business Integration Cristal, Jeddah
  2. 2. Agenda Agenda: 1. An integrated model 2. From HR roadmap to the HEART model of MD 3. MD audits in three global FT 500 companies 4. Conclusions At the back of the room there is a handout, summarizing in a whitepaper what we discussed. When you provide me your email address, I will send you the audit list and an interpretation tool. Email: dr.mark.van.dongen@gmail.com
  3. 3. An integrated model • Succession and talent management has moved to the forefront of the agenda’s of CEO’s worldwide • ‘War for Talent’ will increase due to demographics. • Research has shown that investment in personnel development has a substantial ROI, depending on the right person being developed, to over 200% • In the US $125.88 billion was spent on leadership development; of which 24% on leadership development(ASTD 2009). Nevertheless leadership development remains the least explored topic within the field of leadership. • No integrated theory, or model to date has been accepted. 3
  4. 4. Challenges? • The field of HR is a not a science in itself, it is an amalgamation of different disciplines. • Fragmented elements are developed, but currently there is not an integrated theory on MD. These elements are derived from nonrelated sciences, hence from different methodical setup. • The defined process should be theoretically correct, but also practically useful to both developed as well as less developed companies. • If the MD process is truly seen as a competitive advantage, it will be difficult to get access to data for the empirical part. 4
  5. 5. What is Talent? A talent is an individual, who generates a disproportional higher value compared to the cost to employ them. Therefore talent (as such) is not linked to company hierarchy, nor leadership capability.
  6. 6. Talent For ease of discussion, talent is split out in two ways: 1. Deep talent; individual value creators who do not have vertical talent a) Workers (skills / competencies based deep talents) b) Deep talent (unique deep knowledge based talents) 2. Vertical talents are individuals with the ability to move upward in the organization. In this presentation vertical talent is emphasized
  7. 7. What is leadership Leadership is defined as the ability to exert a conscious influence on the behavior of another person in order to make them pursue targets the leader desires. The most modern form of leadership is value based leadership, which is a scale with two poles, one is the transactional leader the other is the transformational leaders. • Transformation leaders change the individual perception to attain the goal • Transactional leaders reward for changing behavior; bonus for best behavior, etc. • Management is transactional leadership.
  8. 8. Talent and leadership talent Leader-talents are defined as those who: 1. Have the potential (intellectually) to develop themselves into higher level roles (IQ & EQ) 2. Have the development-need-strength to withstand developmental challenges 3. Have the individual engagement to ensure when developing them, that these value adding capabilities benefits your company. 4. Have personal values aligned with the values of the company Gaining, keeping and developing such talents remains on the forefront of CEO´s agenda (CIPD, 2012)
  9. 9. From process to audit tool and standardized company profile Defining and detecting talents Phase based development of talents Organizational prerequisites to the effective process Case study of companies, including generation of profile Details of the process put to 34 International HR directors from 11 countries in 3 surveys Process finalized Items reformulated into 44 questions, that form 16 clusters
  10. 10. Empirical data from a group of companies
  11. 11. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Results on talent defining and detecting talent 32.4% state their organization have no adequate definition of talent and only 26,5% had an organization defining entry level. Combine this with the 44.1% of the companies did not have a valid selection system in place for entry Less then 48.5% match individual values versus those of the company Intellectual capabilities are measured in 51.8 % (IQ) resp. 41.9% (EQ). The rest assumed education as a predictor. 71% measure self motivation to develop, 61.3% stated they measure individual engagement, but tools used were inadequate to measure this 61.8% found reference checks (candidate provided) a ‘good’ method. Research showed a predictive validity of 0.19. (Anderson et.al., 1993, McClelland, 1998). Categories of talent: Deep talent, 8.8% ; 91.2 % vertical talent. 11
  12. 12. HR and MD 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. In 97.1% of companies HR leads MD process, Only in 23.5 % is the MD (leadership development) lead by a ´talent´. Leading MD is needed to become head of HR in 23.5% When reviewing the use of leadership models upon which to base their development, 53% use entirely outdated leadership models (such as situational leadership), though they state they have good knowledge on the topic (58.%). Most people support the definition given on leadership and management. Those that did not, often use SHL methods, which in term supports the definition (Burk et al. (2009) and Burke, (2010)) Full andragogical model were not seen. Only in 37% of the companies, input of the talent on their development track was requested. Of those who stated understanding of leadership, 59,8% were not able to mentioned the model their company used. Exception was situational leadership theory which is still used in 53.3% of the companies. Which either captures low knowledge or low influence by HR.
  13. 13. Organizational prerequisites • Informal talent networks in only 14.7%; • Changing preferences of generations, taken into account in 32.3%. • Team based action learning used in 44% Use of stretch assignments: Expat 54.5% all 35.2% HR X-functional 26.5% HR 64.7% all Job challenge measured in 53% • Stretch assignments: • Perfect fit (90%+) • Near fit (75-90%) • True stretch assignments (60-75% fit) 11,8%, 67.7% 20.6% • 41.1% see mistakes as learning experiences, the remaining 58.1% sees it simply as mistakes. No correlation between the assignment score and ‘mistake’-score. • Job challenge is not measured in 47% of companies. 13
  14. 14. Reviewing performance versus the model of Global Companies
  15. 15. The Audit list items The 16 key elements of the MD model were: 1. Talent is defined 2. Values of the company and the individual are matched at recruitment 3. The culture is more transnational than nationally dominated 4. Capability of individuals are assessed. 5. Methods of development vary as per the individual needs 6. Knowledge is Transferred as per the development phase 7. Stage based development model is adhered to. 8. Feedback is provided to talents, in line with their phase 9. Developmental assignments are used to develop talents. 10.Leaders are made responsible for the development of their talents 11.Active learning initiatives are used 12.Mentoring relationship's and coaching is used 13.Talents are rewarded differently 14.The performance and development cycle is viewed differently 15.There are networking initiatives offered to talents 16.HR leads the MD process and is occupied by talents.
  16. 16. Empirical results; Audited companies 16
  17. 17. Empirical results; Audited companies 17
  18. 18. Empirical results; Audited companies Empirical results; Audited companies TRENDS 18
  19. 19. Conclusion Companies believe MD provides a competitive advantage, it is difficult to obtain data utilizing self-surveys, as self criticism was found difficult. Though Talent is seen as one of the major differentiators for the future, companies often falls behind: – Do not have a robust system of selection and development in place – Do not measure needs for developments and developments offered – Have insufficient knowledge or influence in incorporating leader- development methods. – Have little knowledge on how development works, nor seem to invest much in understanding, instead of cookie-cutting ‘best practice’ solutions.
  20. 20. Conclusions 2 Many companies do not hold leaders accountable for development of their talents, Companies do not reward for potential (future of company) instead reward short term goals achievement Low hanging fruits “left to rot”: Talent networks Leaders accountable for talents Action learning initiatives HR measured and developed as other talents Measure capabilities and their progress
  21. 21. Consequences for HR • Though HR is accountable for MD, they need substantial improvement to increase knowledge – Situational leadership model usage – Use of reference to check on applications – Declining decision style method etc. • For a core process such as MD, signature processes should be developed. • Though talent is seen as strategic asset, little strategy seems to underlie their development. • Some short term solutions would already improve outcome, but longer term reviews are needed.
  22. 22. Develop leaders for the future, Fact based approach Dr. Mark van Dongen HR Director Global Business Integration Cristal, Jeddah

×