Literature DB >> 16250625

Growing talent as if your business depended on it.

Jeffrey M Cohn1, Rakesh Khurana, Laura Reeves.   

Abstract

Traditionally, corporate boards have left leadership planning and development very much up to their CEOs and human resources departments-primarily because they don't perceive that a lack of leadership development in their companies poses the same kind of threat that accounting blunders or missed earnings do. That's a shortsighted view, the authors argue. Companies whose boards and senior executives fail to prioritize succession planning and leadership development end up experiencing a steady attrition in talent and becoming extremely vulnerable when they have to cope with inevitable upheavals- integrating an acquired company with a different operating style and culture, for instance, or reexamining basic operating assumptions when a competitor with a leaner cost structure emerges. Firms that haven't focused on their systems for building their bench strength will probably make wrong decisions in these situations. In this article, the authors explain what makes a successful leadership development program, based on their research over the past few years with companies in a range of industries. They describe how several forward-thinking companies (Tyson Foods, Starbucks, and Mellon Financial, in particular) are implementing smart, integrated, talent development initiatives. A leadership development program should not comprise stand-alone, ad hoc activities coordinated by the human resources department, the authors say. A company's leadership development processes should align with strategic priorities. From the board of directors on down, senior executives should be deeply involved in finding and growing talent, and line managers should be evaluated and promoted expressly for their contributions to the organization-wide effort. HR should be allowed to create development tools and facilitate their use, but the business units should take responsibility for development activities, and the board should ultimately oversee the whole system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16250625

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Harv Bus Rev        ISSN: 0017-8012


  2 in total

1.  Succession planning in US pharmacy schools.

Authors:  Jenny Van Amburgh; Christopher K Surratt; James S Green; Randle M Gallucci; James Colbert; Shara L Zatopek; Robert A Blouin
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 2.047

2.  Refractive Errors and Risk Factors for Myopia in Primary School Students in Urumqi.

Authors:  Meng Liu; Han Qin; Yan Wang; Yunxian Gao
Journal:  Appl Bionics Biomech       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 1.664

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.