| --Max DePree, former Chairman and CEO Herman Miller, Inc., and author of Leadership Is an Art | ||
According to a DDI survey of midsize and large organizations throughout the world, an overwhelming majority of firms want to fill 70 to 80 percent of their executive positions (general manager and above) with internal candidates. Yet most are having trouble doing so (Bernthal, Rioux, & Wellins, 1999).
Several years of corporate downsizing have left companies with fewer middle managers to promote into executive positions. Even more troubling is that many of the remaining middle managers lack the competencies and career experience necessary to run a third-millennium corporation. Much of the shortage of ready-to-promote managers stems from the failure of traditional replacement-planning systems.
Note
denotes that information on this topic is available at the Grow Your Own Leaders web site (www.ddiworld.com/growyourownleaders).
In traditional systems senior and middle managers identify potential replacements for themselves, and sometimes for their direct reports, and estimate when those individuals will be ready to move up the organizational ladder. From these inputs the HR department develops a book or a series of charts showing the backups for each position and their readiness.
Positions with no backups are identified, and meetings are held to do something to fill in the open slots on the charts. That process can consume an inordinate amount of time, with relatively little gain. One major U.S. company discovered that it was devoting 250,000 executive hours a year to completing and discussing replacement-planning forms.
As a rule, companies aren’t getting much of a return on that time investment. Replacement-planning systems are often out of touch with organizational strategies because executives are essentially searching for replacements for themselves. That is, they are looking for people to do the same things they are doing in their current jobs. However, this could be at a time when the company might be executing a new strategy that requires an executive with much-different knowledge and competencies, or the organization might even be eliminating the executive’s job completely. In addition, there’s usually very little focus on skill development; most of the attention is concentrated on job placement. But worst of all, the majority of actual replacement decisions are made outside the replacement-planning system. Most organizations that have done formal research on their succession-planning process have determined that their designated backups actually fill fewer than 30 percent of the open positions for which they were slotted. Thus, companies are spending a large amount of executive time on a system that is not used when needed.
We propose a different approach to grooming executive talent: the Acceleration Pool, which represents a drastic departure from traditional replacement planning. Rather than targeting one or two hand-picked people for each executive position, an Acceleration Pool develops a group of high-potential candidates for executive jobs in general. As the name implies, the development of these pool members is accelerated through stretch job and task force assignments that offer the best learning and highest visibility opportunities. Pool members have an assigned mentor, receive more training, and attend special developmental experiences, such as university executive programs and in-company action learning sessions. They also get more feedback and coaching. Senior management actively tracks pool members’ development and readiness, with the help of the HR department.
In an Acceleration Pool system, senior executives no longer need to worry about deciding who’s going to back up whom in their organization, except for the top positions. The annual chore of completing replacement-planning forms is eliminated, which gives executives more time to focus on skill and knowledge development—that is, on cultivating tomorrow’s leaders.
The size of an Acceleration Pool depends on the number of executive positions, the number of candidates the organization would like to choose from in filling target positions, and the speed at which the organization is growing. Figure 2-1 on the previous page shows a hypothetical example of a pool that might be found in a midsize company (1,000 to 5,000 employees) preparing candidates for general management positions.
There can be many variations on the basic Acceleration Pool shown in Figure 2-1. A larger organization might have two pools—one starting at the supervisory and professional individual contributor level and one starting at the middle management level (see Figure 2-2).
The number of pools often reflects how a company is organized. For example, an Acceleration Pool in a manufacturing organization might exist to fill top plant-management positions, while a pool of middle managers might be designated to fill a range of corporate positions. Often, large strategic business units (SBUs) will have their own Acceleration Pools to fill senior SBU positions in addition to the wider company pool that is aimed at filling senior corporate management positions (see Figure 2-3).
In this chapter we provide an overview of the operation of an Acceleration Pool. In Chapter 3 we’ll explain the purpose and importance of various features of an Acceleration Pool system and how Acceleration Pools can uniquely meet the leadership needs of 21st century organizations. We’ll then answer common questions about Acceleration Pools in Chapter 4. The remainder of this book will expand on the general description provided in these three chapters. Figure 2-4 shows a flowchart of the Acceleration Pool process described in this chapter along with a listing of other chapters containing additional information, tools, and forms. Table 2-1 lists the people and groups involved in an Acceleration Pool.
Table 2-1. People Involved in an Acceleration Pool
The person whose development is being accelerated for a target level (e.g., general management). | |
Pool Member’s Manager | The person to whom the pool member reports. This manager can be at any level in the organization. The manager’s role is to establish an environment for development and provide guidance, coaching, feedback, and reinforcement. |
Pool Member’s Mentor | A manager at a level equal to or higher than the pool member’s manager. The mentor’s role is to provide guidance, support, and organizational and business insights. |
Professional Coach (a.k.a. Executive Coach) | An outside professional who is brought in to work one-on-one with a pool member. Coaches help their clients expand self-awareness and understand their development needs. Coaches help pool members develop new behaviors or interpersonal strategies to overcome executive derailers/competency needs and work with them to measure and monitor growth against desired goals. |
Executive Resource Board (a.k.a. Talent Review Board, Talent Committee, Executive Succession Board, Executive Development Board, Leadership Team, etc.) | In organizations with one pool aimed at producing general management-level candidates, the Executive Resource Board comprises the CEO and/or COO and the division, unit, or SBU heads—the group responsible for filling the target-level positions and operating the Acceleration Pool. When more than one pool exists, organizations usually have a different board for each pool (and a different name), although there is some overlap in membership. |
HR Representative to the Executive Resource Board | The member of the organization who makes the Acceleration Pool system work. The HR representative acts as a catalyst and quality control expert as well as the expert source of information on all parts of the system. |
To fill the pool, each major part of the organization (e.g., divisions, business units, etc.) is asked to nominate people, basing the choice on job performance and an agreed-upon criteria of potential. People can be nominated from any organizational level and career stage: supervisor, middle manager, or senior manager. Individuals might be in the Acceleration Pool for anywhere from 1 to 15 years, depending on when they enter and what their development needs are. This approach is quite different from some “high-potential” development programs that admit people only at the start of their career. Recognizing that individuals’ and organizations’ needs change over time, the Acceleration Pool system is flexible enough to develop leaders at virtually any point in their career or at any time that makes sense for the organization. A senior management committee—which we call the Executive Resource Board and which should include the CEO and/or COO—reviews the nominations against defined criteria and decides who is admitted into the pool.
After prospective pool members are selected, the pros and cons of participating in the accelerated development program are explained to each person who has been invited. Each person then decides on whether to join the pool. It’s important to ensure that there is no stigma or penalty attached to opting out of accelerated development. A wide range of family concerns and other considerations (e.g., the perceived risks involved) might make a candidate feel that it’s not the right time for a high-intensity, accelerated program. Such situations can change, of course, so the individual who opts out may have a chance to join the pool at another time.
Once they have accepted the invitation to join the Acceleration Pool, the new pool members complete an in-depth assessment of strengths and development needs. The members are assessed in terms of four executive descriptors that define the leadership needed to make the organization successful in the future:
Organizational knowledge—. What I know—The functions, processes, systems, and products, services, or technologies of an organization that a general manager must understand. For example, a candidate might be assessed in terms of span of knowledge of company products, how the R&D process operates, or the function provided by the HR department.
Job challenges—. What I have done—The kinds of situations that an individual entering top management should have experienced or at least have been exposed to. Some examples include carrying a key functional assignment through from beginning to end; being heavily involved with a merger, acquisition, strategic alliance, or partnership opportunity; implementing a companywide change; developing and implementing a plan to cut costs or control inventories; negotiating agreements with external organizations; and operating in high-pressure or high-visibility situations.
Competencies—. What I am capable of—The clusters of behavior, knowledge, technical skills, and motivations that are important to success in senior management. Some examples include Change Leadership, Establishing Strategic Direction, Entrepreneurship, and Global Acumen.
Executive derailers—. Who I am—The personality traits that might cause an otherwise effective senior leader to fail on the job. Examples include being:
–Approval Dependent | –Imperceptive |
–Argumentative (Defensive) | –Impulsive |
–Arrogant | –Perfectionistic (Micromanager) |
–Attention-Seeking (Self-Promoting) | –Risk Averse |
–Avoidant | –Volatile |
–Eccentric |
The senior leadership of the organization, based on the organization’s strategic direction and values, selects the specific areas under each of the four descriptors. A variety of methods, including the Acceleration CenterSM (a modern-day assessment center), multirater (360°) instruments, and interviews, are used to diagnose pool members’ development needs.
A professional explains the results of the diagnosis to each pool member and checks on any personal or retention needs that would shape development. Together, they decide how the pool member can maximize the impact of the identified strengths and prioritize the development needs in each of the four executive descriptor areas, creating a Development Priority List.
The Executive Resource Board or its representative reviews the completed Development Priority Lists and diagnostic summary reports to ensure that areas of development need are covered and that the chosen priorities fit with the organization’s strategic direction. This review is important because the priorities determined by an individual pool member might be based on the assumption that the organization is going in a certain direction, when in fact top executives might see it going in a different direction. The new direction might change the relative importance of competencies, organizational knowledge, or job challenges.
After being approved by the Executive Resource Board, the Development Priority Lists become “official”—but that does not mean that they are unchangeable. New insights into development needs usually arise over time, and these should be reflected on the lists. More important, development gaps will be closed as members gain experience in the pool, and this will, of course, change their development needs.
The Executive Resource Board is responsible for placing pool members into situations where they can experience the required job challenges, obtain needed organizational knowledge, develop and leverage competencies, and overcome executive derailers. This is accomplished through a combination of short, high-impact, targeted training programs; short-term learning experiences (e.g., attending conventions or hosting a delegation of foreign customers); and, most of all, meaningful, measurable job or task force assignments where the pool member can be held accountable for results and learn from the experience. Jobs, task force membership, and other longer-term assignments are the most important factors in developing Acceleration Pool members because they offer opportunities to satisfy several development objectives at once. For example, in a given assignment, an individual might encounter two job challenges and three areas of organization knowledge, have a chance to develop one competency, and be able to address one derailer. It is very important to note that all development is within the context of high-quality job performance—not something done in addition to an individual’s job. There is a clear link between successful development and job success. Both are accomplished at the same time.
The Executive Resource Board also determines who should attend major training events, such as university programs or programs developed exclusively for Acceleration Pool members (e.g., action learning). An action learning program enables pool members to work in teams as they confront major organizational issues and make recommendations to senior management. Strategy-orientation programs represent another training alternative often tailored for Acceleration Pool members. The Executive Resource Board also decides whether it is appropriate to make an executive coach available to specific pool members. The board uses the Development Priority List and its understanding of individual pool members’ personal and retention needs to make these decisions.
The Executive Resource Board typically meets with the heads of organizational or business units at least twice a year to review major personnel movements and discuss talent development. Board members review Acceleration Pool members’ progress at that time and consider ways to speed their development.
Because the ultimate goal of the Executive Resource Board is to fill key positions with ready talent, the organization’s needs must be in balance with each individual’s needs. As specific solutions to individual development needs are considered, business demands and associated job requirements are considered as well. These factors result in a series of trade-off decisions about how to develop a pool member and when to place the person into a key role. The trade-offs also often involve people not in the Acceleration Pool who may be considered for certain positions. Organizational movement can be horizontal as well as vertical, and the board relies heavily on task force assignments to minimize moves that would adversely affect a pool member’s personal life.
After job and training assignments are made, a representative of the Executive Resource Board meets with each pool member (in person or over the phone) to review the decisions and discuss how the assignment or training fits with the person’s development priorities and expressed personal interests. This is how pool members learn what specific competencies and challenges they are to work on in their new assignments. Because pool members understand the purpose of the assignment or training and its potential value to their personal development, they are more likely to be enthusiastic about it and be fully committed to its success.
Pool members meet with their current manager (or their manager in their new assignment) and their mentor to pin down the specifics of how to develop the competencies, job challenges, and organizational knowledge suggested by the Executive Resource Board while also accomplishing the objectives of their job assignment. Usually the effective completion of the assignment is itself the principle development goal. Other development goals are always closely tied to assignment success (e.g., the manager, mentor, and pool member might discuss a derailer that could cause problems and ways to avoid it, or they might talk about how the development of a target competency or area of organizational knowledge will contribute to success during the next year). This discussion is where the “rubber meets the road” in making the development come about. The manager and the mentor are prepared for their roles through orientation and training.
In preparation for these meetings, Acceleration Pool members complete the first part of a Development Action Form (see Appendix 2-1) for each of the areas to be developed. This form forces pool members to think about how they will achieve the targeted development (skills, behavior, knowledge), how they can apply the newly learned development targets on the job, and how they will measure the effectiveness of the application (ideally on job performance measures). This encourages pool members to focus on applying skills, behavior, and knowledge rather than on merely learning them in an abstract sense. For example, Acceleration Pool members should not be evaluated on completing a developmental opportunity, such as a training program, but rather on measurements of organizational change brought on by their using the new skills or knowledge back in the workplace. With such application targets defined before a training program, pool members are able to focus on applying development goals during the training. They are also in a better position to tap into an instructor’s special knowledge or get coaching from other people to help them learn how to apply their new skills or knowledge. Most important, they see the development project as part of their job—to make them more successful—not as an add-on.
As one might expect, a pool member in a new assignment might not know enough about opportunities offered by the job to complete the first part of the Development Action Form for some development targets. The manager and mentor can be a big help in the planning process by talking through issues and possibilities. More important, the meeting helps gain the manager’s and the mentor’s buy-in and commitment to the pool member’s learning and skill application goals. This is important because the manager might have to add or take away job responsibilities or performance goals to facilitate development in an area. For example, a manager might assign managing the budgeting process to someone who needs a better understanding of the process and the organization’s long-range planning.
The planning meeting also provides an opportunity for the pool member, the manager, and the mentor to explore additional areas from the Development Priority List that the job assignment might offer. These opportunities typically arise in the form of short-term learning experiences or prescriptive training programs that are open to everyone in the organization. For example, someone in need of presentation skills might attend a course on that topic sponsored by the business unit and then be asked to present a new product at field offices to demonstrate the new skills.
Discussions at the planning meeting and subsequent meetings allow the manager and mentor to remain in touch with the pool member’s personal and retention needs so those needs can be considered in the individual’s development plans and communicated, where appropriate, to the Executive Resource Board. For example, a pool member might need to return to his or her hometown because an elderly parent is dependent on the person for support and care. Where feasible, the pool member’s manager can meet this need by assigning projects near the individual’s hometown. However, only the Executive Resource Board would have the authority to move a pool member to a desired location.
Responsibility for completing and executing the Development Action Form belongs with the pool member alone. The mentor and manager simply provide counsel, open doors, and make resources available.
After completing a development project (e.g., running an R&D team as part of the job assignment) or training program, pool members evaluate success against their defined objectives. They review their accomplishments (or lack thereof) with their manager and mentor, and then record their achievements on the second part of the Development Action Form. As we mentioned, this is typically done at the end of a project. If the project lasts six months or more, intermediate progress should be reviewed to allow the mentor and manager to offer help as needed.
Each Acceleration Pool member keeps a Career Development Portfolio, which includes the member’s Development Priority List, an up-to-date personal information form, completed performance appraisal forms, and completed and in-progress Development Action Forms. The portfolio serves as a repository for all the individual’s development information.
When entering the Acceleration Pool, members agree to make this portfolio’s contents available to the Executive Resource Board. In turn, the board agrees to review the portfolios every six months—a relatively easy task if portfolios are posted on the corporate intranet with access limited to respective pool members and the Executive Resource Board.
At least every six months, the Executive Resource Board considers whether pool members will be reassigned, sent to special training events, given an executive coach, or maintain their current assignments for continued development. If some action is decided, the plan is discussed with the pool member. The operation of the Executive Resource Board is discussed at length in Chapter 15, Optimizing Your Talent Review Discussion.
We believe that Acceleration Pools offer an attractive alternative to traditional replacement-planning systems and are more in touch with the needs of 21st century organizations and managers. An Acceleration Pool approach is not a cure-all, and it’s not easy. It’s also not as hard as you might think after looking at the flowchart in Figure 2-4. We believe that the Acceleration Pool uses no more top management time than traditional replacement planning yet produces better results. The Executive Resource Board has a more accurate and organized way of making decisions about who gets into the Acceleration Pool and more meaningful information on which to make development decisions about pool members. We have seen the efficiency and quality of discussions of Executive Resource Boards totally change as they’ve adopted the more behavioral, data-oriented approach provided by Acceleration Pools.
Acceleration Pools take up significantly less time of managers, who no longer have to fill out replacement-planning forms each year. By putting the responsibility of record keeping on the people being developed, and by giving them forms to guide their discussions and planning, we are maximizing the relationship between these individuals and their managers and mentors. And their meetings are much more productive and meaningful.
Most important, you will have the leaders you need. We have seen the ideas endorsed by this book successfully used in organizations of every size and shape. And from a personal standpoint, we know that Acceleration Pools work well because we’re using the system within Development Dimensions International.
Part 1: Development Plan |
Name: ______________________________ Date: ________________ |
Job/Title: __________________________________________________ |
Department/SBU:____________________________________________ |
Development goal? Specify job challenge, organizational knowledge, competency, or derailer, and add clarifying information as needed. You can list more than one on this form if they can be developed by the same action. Explain how your development in this executive descriptor will enhance your success in your position: |
How will learning be obtained if required (e.g., coaching, observation, training program, membership on a committee)? |
Define the support needed to accomplish the learning (if required). |
How will the development goal be applied? (Be specific [e.g., project, person, group].) |
Define the support needed to apply the development goal. |
How will intermediate achievements be tracked (if appropriate)? (When should next meeting with manager or mentor be?) |
Specify the date for completing the application of the development goal, and describe how you will document accomplishment of learning. |
Part 2: Development Results |
Evaluate the acquisition of learning. If learning goals weren’t met, list the reasons why. |
Evaluate the application of the behavior, skill, or knowledge. If application goals weren’t met, list the reasons why. |
What did you learn about developing your skills and knowledge or by changing your behavior? |
Probable future application of the behavior, skill, or knowledge: |
What additional skills or knowledge was obtained? |
What could have been done to make your development process more rewarding? |
What general insights into leadership or management did you develop (if any)? |