What the Best Frameworks Get Right.

Let’s be honest: Somewhere out there, another organization has a competency model that feels cleaner, sharper and more actionable than yours.

The roles are clearly defined. Skills, behaviors and proficiency levels are transparent. Development paths make sense. There are learning programs that support it. Managers actually use it. Employees understand it.

And meanwhile, in your organization … the competency model is either generic, outdated, overly complex, inconsistently applied, or still sitting somewhere in draft form.

If that sounds familiar, you’re not alone.

The Quiet Struggle Behind Competency Models

Competency models sit at the intersection of strategy, talent and behavior, which is exactly why they’re so hard to get right.

They’re expected to:

• Define what “good” looks like
• Align with business strategy
• Be usable for hiring, development and performance
• Work across roles, levels, and geographies

That’s a tall order.

Much like change management, organizations often jump to the visible elements — wordsmithing competencies or building frameworks — without first building the underlying structure that makes them usable and sustainable.

The result? Models that look great on paper but don’t drive results.

So, if you’ve ever felt “competency model envy,” you’re not alone. Most organizations are still figuring this out. That’s why we spoke to Shari Chernack, Chief People Officer at Isaacson, Miller and advisor on talent and transformation, who has seen a lot of competency models succeed and fail. She revealed that the best competency models have seven elements in common.

What the Best Competency Models Get Right

Strong competency models are designed for action. Here’s a practical framework to guide you:

1. Clarity Over Completeness

The best competency models resist the urge to include everything.

Organizations often start with a core set of competencies but gradually add technical competencies and role-specific requirements until the framework becomes too large and difficult to use. Strong competency models focus on:

• 6-12 core competencies per role or level
• Clear, distinct definitions
• Minimal overlap
• Consistent organizational needs

If managers can’t explain the competencies without looking them up, the model is too complex.

If your organization needs a more sophisticated model, start small and evolve it over time. Progress matters more than perfection. Set the right foundation, then iterate.

2. Behavior-Based (Not Buzzword-Based)

“Strategic thinking”
“Collaboration”
“Leadership presence”

These sound valuable, but without observable behaviors, they are difficult to apply consistently.

Competencies can oftentimes be so broad and high level that employees don’t even know what they mean. Employees need clarity on what competencies mean within their specific roles.

Strong models define:

• What the competency looks like in practice
• What strong performance looks like
• What falling short of expectations looks like

This is where models shift from abstract to usable.

For example, “strategic thinking” becomes: “Anticipates future conditions and translates insights into priorities, trade-offs, and actions that drive performance.” Or “Weighs short-term wins against long-term impact and makes explicit trade-offs.”

3. Connected to Organizational Values and Differentiators

One of the most common challenges organizations face is understanding where competency models fit within the broader talent ecosystem.

Organizations already have mission and vision statements, core values, skills taxonomies and business goals. Without clear alignment, competency models can feel like just another framework layered on top of existing processes.

Competency models operationalize your values. Or, as Chernack says, “The values are how we live and the competencies are how we work.”

Competencies translate values into specific, observable behaviors that employees can understand, apply and develop. Competencies answer the question: What does this value look like in action?

Strong competency models make this connection explicit. For example, Chernack recalls a time where she rolled out a competency model in-house. “It actually laddered right up to our core values,” she said. “So it was the behaviors underpinning the values and then everything that we did around leadership development was tied to those competencies.”

The best competency models also reflect what makes an organization uniquely successful.

Organizations should avoid borrowing external competency frameworks or relying on generic industry language. The result is a model that could belong to almost any company, and that’s not what you want. Competency models should reflect what drives success inside the organization itself.

To identify those differentiators, organizations can examine top performers and ask:

• What do our best people do differently?
• What behaviors led to our biggest successes?
• What behaviors do we want others to replicate?

Behavioral interviews and structured discussions with high performers can help uncover these patterns.

When competency models align with both organizational values and real drivers of success, they become more than a framework. They become a system that connects culture, performance and strategy.

4. Aligned to Real Work

Competencies should be specific and grounded in practical examples and role-specific expectations. They should reflect how work gets done. That means:

• Grounding competencies in real job tasks
• Incorporating input from high performers
• Reflecting the realities of different employee groups

For example, what “communication” looks like for a corporate employee may be very different from someone in the field, and your model should reflect that.

A broad communication competency might read: “Conveys information clearly, concisely and with intent. Adapts message, tone and medium to drive understanding and action.”

For a corporate executive: “Synthesizes complex information into clear messages that align diverse stakeholders and drive decisions and execution.”

For a field team lead: “Delivers clear, timely and actionable information that drives team understanding, performance and consistent execution.”

5. Scalable Across Levels

A strong model shows progression. Instead of rewriting competencies for every level:

• Use consistent competency categories
• Differentiate by depth, scope, and complexity
• Show how expectations evolve from entry-level to leadership

This creates clarity around growth and makes career paths visible.

For example, a new leader’s strategic thinking competency might be, “Recognizes patterns in day-to-day operations and makes proactive adjustments to improve near-term performance and team effectiveness.”

For a senior leader, it could be: “Interprets broader business trends and cross-functional dynamics to set direction, allocate resources, and drive long-term performance across multiple teams or locations.”

6. Launched, Adopted, Integrated

If your competency model lives only as a PDF, it’s already failing.

Chernack has seen good competency models go to waste. Many organizations invest in developing competencies, but they don’t invest in rolling them out. This is where change management helps. Employees and managers need to understand the purpose of the model and how to use it.

It is also helpful to involve people closest to the work during development and rollout. Competency models built without input from employees and managers often struggle to gain traction.

The best models are integrated into:

• Hiring and interview guides
• Performance management processes
• Learning and development programs
• Succession planning efforts

Think of competency models as infrastructure, not documentation.

7. Easy to Use Daily

The ultimate test to determine if a competency model is good is whether a manager can use it in a one-on-one conversation without preparation. If not, simplify. Because adoption is what drives value.

How to Get Started

You don’t need a six-month project to build a better competency model. In fact, speed can be your advantage. Here’s a practical way to get traction fast:

Step 1: Start with one role (or job family).

Pick a high-impact role or a role undergoing change. Build your model there first, then expand.

Step 2: Identify top performers.

Ask:

• What do the best people in this role do differently?
• What behaviors drive success?

Focus on reality, not theory.

Step 3: Define core competencies.

Group knowledge, skills, abilities and behaviors into themes:

• Decision-making
• Communication
• Execution
• Collaboration
• Leadership (if applicable)

Keep it tight.

Step 4: Write observable behaviors.

For each competency:

• Define 3-5 clear behaviors
• Make them specific and actionable
• Avoid jargon

If you can’t observe it, it’s not a behavior.

Step 5: Validate with managers.

Before rolling anything out:

• Test it with people leaders
• Ask: Does this accurately reflect what we want for this role? Would this be valuable in hiring or performance management?
• Refine based on feedback

Remember: usability beats elegance.

Step 6: Pilot and iterate.

Treat your model like a product:

• Launch it in one area
• Gather feedback
• Improve it

The best competency models are built over time, not in a single workshop.

Progress Over Perfection

Competency models often feel like something organizations need to “get right” before launch. They don’t.

Organizations that make the most progress treat competency models the same way they treat any change. They start with a clear structure, focus on what matters most, and build momentum through use.

Success doesn’t come from winning over everyone immediately or perfecting every detail upfront. It comes from building something practical that employees and managers will actually use.

So, if you’re feeling competency model envy, take it as a signal — not of failure, but of opportunity.

Because the gap between “what exists today” and “what is needed tomorrow” is exactly where better design (and better outcomes) begin.

Want to explore this topic in more detail or learn more about Emerson? Hop on his calendar: Book a meeting with Rich

Early in my career, I was asked to build a new business inside a global consulting firm.

I recruited over thirty high-performing professionals with strong reputations. They were talented, credible, and ambitious. They were also scattered across the United States working on unrelated client engagements, with no natural reason to feel connected to one another.

If they remained a loose collection of individual performers, we would fail.

I needed them to align around a new idea. I needed common frameworks and tools. I needed standards that would apply across projects. Most of all, I needed them to see themselves as part of something shared.

So I designed for it.

I spoke to each person directly. I created quarterly offsites where we built our tools together. I designed a team book with photos and personal details so people could connect as humans, not just resumes. (I actually found the book! It’s pictured above)

The talent was there. What changed was the cohesion.

Together we created a standard for operating. We grew the business from zero to $38 million.

This is the work every leader faces, whether inheriting a team or building one from scratch. The question isn’t whether belonging exists. The question is whether we leave it to chance or design it deliberately.

Belonging is not a sentiment. It is structure. And it can be built through five elements: Fit, Form, Function, Focus, and Frequency.

Fit: Who belongs here? 

Not everyone who is attracted to your team is a fit for your team. Effective teams are not open by default. They are intentionally selective.

Fit isn’t about likeability or cultural sameness. It’s about mutual expectations, what the work demands, and what each person must contribute. When we make those expectations explicit and select our team members accordingly, we make belonging durable.

Aaron Carruthers, Executive Director of California’s State Council on Developmental Disabilities, leads a thirty-one-member governing body that impacts statewide advocacy and policy. Members include people with developmental disabilities, family members, and representatives from state agencies. Each member serves a six-year term.

The appointment process is rigorous by design. Regional managers identify potential members. Candidates formally apply, participate in multiple interviews, and if selected, apply to the Governor’s office. The bar is high, and the expectations are explicit.

As Aaron explains, “Belonging isn’t ‘Do I have a seat at the table? That’s tolerance. Belonging is, ‘We’re going to be different because you’re here.’ We clearly talk about their impact. We tell people directly: Here’s how this organization changed because you are here.”

That clarity creates commitment. Members show up prepared and alumni remain engaged long after their terms end. Belonging persists because it was grounded in fit – real authority paired with responsibility.

Early in my firm’s growth, I confused kindness with inclusion and effort with fit. I kept someone on the team who was capable but not aligned with how we worked. The result wasn’t harmony; it was a quiet drag. When I finally clarified expectations and made a hard call, performance didn’t dip. It improved. The team grew stronger because the standards were clear.

Leaders often fear that being selective will feel exclusionary. The opposite is true.

Fit, clearly defined, is what makes belonging meaningful. Without it, teams take on passengers. With it, they earn loyalty, accountability, and sustained performance.

Form: What does belonging look like in this context?

Belonging must match the current form of your organization.

A team going through a transformation needs something different than a team in a steady state. For example, during a rebuilding stage, belonging requires clarity, speed, and disciplined connection, not broad participation. We might need fewer voices, tighter decisions, and greater reliance on proven expertise. As stability increases, we can widen ownership and invite in more perspectives.

Leaders make a mistake when they offer the same version of belonging everywhere.

Following senior leadership roles at Amazon and Robert Half, Sean Perry joined a global staffing agency as CIO during a full-scale organizational transformation. Once an industry powerhouse, the firm retrenched to the U.S. market and grew fragmented — with teams aligned to their own business units rather than to the enterprise.

He started with a guiding question: How do we give people great tools while eliminating unnecessary complexity?

He introduced a Brain Trust – not to solve problems but to define them clearly. This helped teams understand what others were working on and how their decisions affected one another. He replaced a weekly meeting with a 15-minute, voluntary 8:00 a.m. standup three days a week. It quickly reached 90% attendance and proved far more effective for connection, quick issue resolution, and information flow. Teams also adopted six-page annual planning documents covering what happened, what went wrong, customer pain points, and what the team intends to do differently. Leaders read each other’s documents to build a shared understanding.

Early on, Sean organized the work by function, to restore operational control. Later, once the core operating practices were in place, he loosened the structure, shifting toward cross-functional collaboration and shared ownership.

The form evolved as the organization stabilized.

In one phase of rebuilding my own organization, I over-democratized decisions when what we needed was speed. It felt inclusive. It wasn’t effective. When we narrowed decision rights temporarily, alignment and efficiency improved. And so did trust.

Belonging must change as conditions change. Design how your team connects and contributes to match the stage you’re in.

Function: Who decides what?

Belonging does not mean everyone decides everything.

Healthy teams separate inclusion from authority. They distinguish between being heard, being considered, and being accountable for the outcome.

As a senior enterprise leader navigating major business transformation, Janey Piroli faced a familiar problem: capable teams that felt siloed and disempowered to make decisions. In response, she introduced PACE teams – Purposeful, Accelerated, Cross-Functional, and Empowered – structured as twelve-week sprints working on strategic priorities.

They designed these teams intentionally. Each had an executive sponsor, decision rights, and representation across regions and functions. Groups were kept small – seven to nine people – so they could go deep. The target was to reduce participants’ day-to-day workload by 50%. Team members received coaching. Leaders were encouraged to experiment. Sloppy first drafts were expected.

The impact was measurable. Engagement scores rose ten to fifteen points. Participants reported stronger connection and greater confidence when making decisions. Just as importantly, they carried what they learned back into the organization.

Function worked because belonging carried accountability. Participation was purposeful, and authority was explicit.

Focus: What matters most?

Belonging directs attention. It clarifies priorities, reinforces shared standards, and signals what the team exists to accomplish.

Dr. Ramona Arora, human capital field researcher and enterprise talent development executive at Dell Technologies and The Walt Disney Company, notes that organizations such as Disney, Dell, and her current organization, Cencora (formerly AmerisourceBergen), have endured by redefining leadership. They shifted from measuring leaders solely on what they produce to holding them accountable for how they produce it.

Belonging, in this sense, is not about comfort, but about contribution. It signals that you are part of something, and responsible for shaping it.

At Disney, that shared ownership shows up through a clear norm around feedback. Creatives across Disney Animation Studios, Marvel, Lucasfilm, and Searchlight expect notes: ongoing, candid input designed to strengthen the work as it unfolds over years. Notes are not criticism. They are participation, and a disciplined form of listening.

That same philosophy extends beyond the creative room. Disney doesn’t see audiences as passive observers. It seeks to make them feel part of the story itself, emotionally invested and connected.

Listening as a belonging practice carries into Ramona’s work at Cencora. Employees from the frontlines work directly with patients and customers to gather notes. “Listening is one of the most tangible ways we practice belonging,” Ramona explains. “Employee, patient, and customer stories shape how we work. They are not on the sidelines of our mission. They are part of building it.”

Belonging and high performance are not in tension. But that belief has to live in norms. Leaders must be willing to say, “That’s not working,” and model letting go of ego, whether that note comes from a colleague, a frontline team member, or someone the organization serves.

According to Ramona, what sustains that effort is curiosity. “Curiosity functions both as a behavior and a signal. It gives people permission to raise a hand, challenge a process, step away and return with something better.”  Curiosity makes listening possible. It keeps standards high while keeping people open.

Focus becomes powerful when we make priorities explicit and curiosity safe. People don’t just feel included. They direct their energy toward improvement.

Frequency: How often do leaders reinforce belonging?

Frequency turns belonging from intent into habit.

Every time Sean Perry’s team met for a short 8:00 a.m. touch-base, they reinforced connection to one another and commitment to shared goals. Meeting three times a week signaled urgency. The pace itself communicated that the work mattered and that staying aligned was non-negotiable.

Janey Piroli’s twelve-week sprint cycles sent a similar signal. Repetition reinforced that strategic problems deserved focused attention, and that thoughtful contributions would have visible impact. The cadence created momentum and closure.

In my own leadership practice, I’ve learned that inspiration fades but cadence holds. We start each week with a standing executive session tied to a single priority, and close with an optional all-hands that reconnects us to shared outcomes. The agenda shifts, but the rhythm doesn’t. That consistency reinforces alignment. And when we’ve skipped it during busy stretches, drift shows up immediately – slower decisions, narrower thinking.

Without frequency, even well-designed systems decay.

Research helps explain why. Anthropologist Dimitris Xygalatas has shown that repeated group practices, even simple ones, create emotional regulation and social connection. Predictability lowers uncertainty. Familiar rhythms build trust.

Belonging doesn’t live in mission statements. It lives in the habits leaders repeat.

Belonging, by Design

As Janey Piroli puts it, “Belonging lives in the head, heart, and hands of leadership. It requires moving away from command-and-control toward awareness of systems, structures and people. Training alone isn’t enough. It has to be embedded.”

That’s why Fit, Form, Function, Focus, and Frequency matter. Together, they turn belonging from an abstract ideal into a practical operating model. Leaders decide who belongs, how work is organized, who holds authority, what matters now, and how often teams reconnect to purpose and standards.

When these elements are designed intentionally, belonging accelerates performance. Ideas surface faster. Accountability strengthens. Energy compounds.

Belonging isn’t something you declare. It’s something you build. And when leaders design it well, teams don’t just feel connected. They deliver.

If you want to assess the health of your organization, pay attention to your meetings.

Many organizations want a culture that promotes innovation, risk-taking, respect, safety, and inclusion. But does your organizational culture really live up to those values? There’s an easy way to find out.

If you want to understand an organization’s culture, don’t read its values statement or mission – sit in on its meetings.

Because meetings are culture in action. They show what works in a company — how people relate, communicate, make decisions, and spend time.

Meetings are microcosms of the organization. They’re where values become visible — not in posters or mission statements, but in habits.

Observe what happens in meetings, then decide what that reveals about your culture. Does it match what your organization wants to be?

Power in the Room

Who speaks — and who doesn’t — tells you everything about power and hierarchy.

• Sometimes one leader dominates and decisions are made by decree. Is it more of a speech or a meeting? Are others contributing? Or does silence equal safety?

If ideas flow freely, that’s a sign of trust and inclusion. Your organization is making space for dissent and curiosity.

Decision-Making in Real Time

Meetings reveal how your organization makes and executes decisions. Or do they get made at all?

• Cultures that prize accountability make decisions, document them, establish accountability and ownership, and move on.
• Cultures that fear conflict circle endlessly, adding another meeting to “discuss further.”

When teams leave a meeting knowing exactly who’s doing what and why, that’s a culture of clarity, alignment, and execution. When they leave unsure, that’s a sign of culture too.

Respect for Time = Respect for People

A meeting that starts late, lacks an agenda, or drifts without purpose isn’t just inefficient — it’s disrespectful. How does your organization use time?

• A disciplined meeting culture signals a disciplined organization. It tells employees their time is valuable, and that the organization runs on intention, not inertia.
• The opposite — calendar clutter, over-meeting, endless status updates – says, “We don’t trust, we don’t prioritize, and we don’t empower.”

Psychological Safety on Display

Meetings are the stage for psychological safety: the belief that people can take risks without fear. Let’s focus on what we can observe:

• Do team members share half-formed ideas or only polished ones?
• Do they admit what they don’t know or keep it to themselves and catch up later?
• When someone challenges the group, does it spark energy or awkward quiet?

The answers show whether learning and innovation are truly valued or just talked about.

Inclusion Is Visible

In today’s hybrid world, inclusion shows up (or doesn’t) in every meeting.

• Are remote voices invited in or do you have to be in the room to get a word in?
• Are junior employees heard or only leadership?
• Are meetings designed for all communication styles or just the loudest?

Inclusive meetings create belonging. Exclusive ones reinforce walls.

Meetings as a Mirror

Every organization has rituals that shape its culture. Meetings are one of the most powerful — and the most overlooked. Think about the culture you want and the one your meetings reveal.

• They can reinforce hierarchy or build empowerment.
• They can waste time or create alignment and performance.
• They can drain energy or build trust.

Meetings aren’t just about productivity; they’re about identity.

Take a hard look at your meetings, and you might just fix your culture.

Want a quick assessment tool? Use this one: Meeting Health Assessment

Want to explore this topic in more detail or learn more about Emerson? Hop on his calendar: Book a meeting with Rich

How Professionals Stay Smart in the Artificial Intelligence Age.

A user once asked a generative AI tool to come up with an original idea for children using a Lego set. The tool’s answer: “Imagine a Lego set that allows you to build a fully functioning time machine with intricate details and moving parts. This set combines the fun of building with Legos with an educational twist, teaching kids about historical eras and famous landmarks as they embark on time-traveling adventures.” What? Imagine the health hazards, the lawsuits, the damage to our current timeline…

Ok, that’s a delightfully harmless example. (Well, until we invent time travel anyway.) But misinformation isn’t always so obvious.

And we need to know when AI gets things wrong, because the consequences can range from funny to embarrassing to catastrophic.

Inaccurate data, flawed guidance, or hallucinated case studies can erode trust, trigger poor decisions, and damage your relationship with your team or your customers.

Nowadays, we pretty much have to use artificial intelligence, right? From generating marketing content to summarizing research and writing code, AI is saving time and unlocking creativity. It feels like if you’re not using it, you’re a step behind.

The good news: you can harness AI’s power without falling victim to its little robot lies.

The Misinformation Problem

The term “hallucination” is often used to describe when generative AI tools produce information that sounds plausible but is oh so wrong. These tools are powerful language models, not search engines. They don’t take a skeptical view or verify sources. They predict language based on patterns, not validity.

In 2023, a New York attorney used ChatGPT to draft a legal filing that cited six entirely fabricated cases. The AI-generated cases didn’t exist, but they looked real enough to pass an initial glance. The result? Sanctions and professional embarrassment. (Source: NYT)

Think about the high-stakes situations you might confront:

• A strategy deck citing false data could mislead executives and derail decisions.
• An AI-written employee communication could spread confusion if it includes misquotes or outdated policy references.
• A government contract could be rejected if AI invents credentials or claims.

Misinformation doesn’t always look like fiction. It often seems credible.

Three Traps for Business Professionals

Overtrusting Output

AI sounds confident. Its tone is polished. But confidence is not accuracy. (We all know people who fit this profile, right?) Professionals pressed for time might generate, copy, paste, and trust without verifying.

A psychological dynamic called “authority bias” is to blame: we tend to trust information from sources that “sound” authoritative, even if they aren’t.

False Citations or “Source Laundering”

Some generative AI tools fabricate sources or mix real citations with fake ones. Even when sources are accurate, they may be out of context or misrepresented.

In one test, ChatGPT cited a Harvard Business Review article that didn’t exist, but with a title and author combination that seemed plausible.

The Chicago Sun-Times published a 2025 Summer Reading List recommending 15 titles. The problem: ten of them were not real. The journalist relied on a third-party source that had used AI to generate the list.

A separate news item found that if you ask Chat GPT for links to sources, and there aren’t any, it will simply make them up.

Context Collapse

AI lacks situational awareness. It may pull ideas from unrelated fields or fail to consider the unique regulatory, cultural, or industry context that matters in your decision-making.

Five Ways to Stay Smart and Safe with AI

Always verify sources.

If AI offers a citation, check it manually. Follow the link. Search for the document. If it doesn’t exist, that’s your first red flag.

Pro Tip: Use AI tools like Perplexity.ai or Consensus.app, which prioritize sourcing and transparency over polish.

Add a layer of human judgment.

AI can accelerate your thinking, but it should not replace it. Ask yourself:

• Does this make sense in our context?
• What’s missing?
• Who would be harmed if this were wrong?

Think of AI as your intern, not your expert advisor. Its job is to help you think, not to do your thinking for you.

Use AI transparency settings.

Tools like ChatGPT Enterprise or Copilot often offer audit trails or cite where their information came from. Use these features to assess credibility.

If you’re using AI inside your organization, push vendors to explain how their models generate outputs and what guardrails are in place.

Insist on a human in the loop.

In regulated or high-stakes industries (e.g., healthcare, finance, government), build processes that require human review before AI-generated content is published or decisions are made.

This aligns with the GROW coaching model: AI may help define the Goal and assess Reality, but Options and Will must come from human insight and accountability.

Train teams to spot and stop AI misinformation.

Embed AI literacy into onboarding, upskilling, and leadership development. Teach employees:

• How to question AI output
• What to verify (and how)
• When to escalate concerns

And remember what we change management pros preach: changing behavior requires awareness, engagement, action, and reinforcement.

The Enemy

It’s not generative AI. Complacency is the enemy.

Generative AI isn’t malicious. It’s simply not designed to be truthful. It’s designed to be useful. As business professionals, it’s on us to pair AI’s speed and creativity with our discernment and ethics.

The most dangerous misinformation isn’t always the most outrageous. It’s the quiet, almost-right statement that slips through our filters because we’re too rushed, too trusting, or too dazzled by the tech.

In the age of AI, wisdom isn’t knowing everything. It’s knowing what to double-check.

If AI is the future of work, why are we designing away people who do the work?

The business case for AI is efficiency. That usually means fewer jobs.

Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, warned Axios that AI would lead to the “mass elimination of jobs across technology, finance, law, consulting and other white-collar roles, especially entry-level gigs.”

Noam Scheiber, from the New York Times, found that experienced workers aren’t safe either – companies are questioning the need for costly oversight when AI can make cheap labor more productive.

Whether we’re rookies or veterans, the financial incentive is clear: the organization will be leaner.

Traditionally, people grew into leadership by moving through roles that gave them critical on-the-ground experience. But today, those foundational roles are the first to be automated.

Are we eliminating the lived experience that feeds our leadership pipelines?

TaQuonda Hill, a senior information technology transformation leader, and I discussed the potential impact on succession planning and talent development.

The Irreplaceable Skills

Repetitive tasks have value. Flipping burgers, writing procedures, researching case law, or calming angry callers builds something more enduring than muscle memory. These experiences teach us how to lead.

Among the lessons:

Empathy. If you’ve done the job, you understand the people who still do it. It makes you more relatable — and more effective. Empathy is the foundation of connection.

Grasp of Implications & Context. You don’t know what you don’t know. But when you’ve done the work, you’re more likely to anticipate unintended consequences. Consider Boeing’s 737 Max crisis. Leadership outsourced critical engineering oversight for speed and savings. But without the institutional memory and technical fluency, they missed the risk. Tragic results followed.

As TaQuonda put it, “When you strip out the context, you gut the leadership pipeline. You might gain speed, but you lose the lived experience that turns managers into leaders.”

Team Development. People don’t scale. Teams do. And good teams are built by people who know how to work through complexity. One of my first summer jobs was at Burger King. A colleague made a point of slinging hot oil my way. It wasn’t fun. But it was formative. I learned to navigate conflict and win people over without authority.

As TaQuonda put it, “AI can make work transactional. But leadership isn’t transactional – it’s relational. If we raise a generation of leaders who’ve never had to influence, inspire, or navigate uncertainty, we’ll lose what makes them credible.”

Cultural Awareness and Navigation. Knowing what will and won’t work in a given organization takes experience. Call it politics if you want, but it’s how things get done. Being right isn’t enough. You have to understand the system you’re in, and how to move within it.

The fantasy is that tech will replace people. The reality is that it replaces undifferentiated effort. This leaves us with a greater need for people who can think, adapt, and scale others. Insight comes from experience, and we’re cutting the very roles that grow it.

The Risk of Outsourcing Potential

Traditionally, leadership was forged in the trenches: prioritizing under pressure, communicating across silos, and failing forward. Early-career roles weren’t glamorous, but they offered repetition, feedback, and the slow build of judgement.

If we are not careful, we’ll eliminate this development stage entirely. More than ever, leadership development must be intentional.

TaQuonda believes that “Leadership development needs to be treated like product development – intentional, resourced, and iterated. You can’t outsource wisdom.”

“Some organizations are building escalators – fast, effective AI-driven paths to decision making. But real leadership is built on stairs: deep skills, context, and ability to tell a story because you’ve lived it.”

And that’s the key. “Talent is currency,” TaQuonda adds. “But it’s not about what skills someone has – it’s about the impact they can deliver. That’s what leaders need to recognize and grow.”

What Great Organizations Are Doing

According to TaQuonda, we’re still learning where AI fits into our organizations. “It’s not Big Bang. It’s iterative. We start with buttons, not blueprints.” That means evolving not just the technology, but how we lead through change.

“We’re used to investing in tech labs to drive innovation,” she notes. “Maybe it’s time we invested in leadership labs to do the same for judgement, storytelling, and behavioral skills.” In this new model, learning isn’t confined to training sessions; it’s embedded in the work. “We don’t just train – we rotate, experiment, and test. You build it, you run it. That creates accountability.”

The Takeaway

It might look like we’re outsourcing our bench. In reality, we’re weakening our succession plans.

AI is here. But our future depends on human leaders.

We can outsource tasks. We can’t outsource wisdom.

“They appeared to know enough to justify their jobs, and nothing more.” — Michael Lewis, The Big Short

Michael Lewis described financial experts who missed the signs of the housing crash—but his words resonate just as strongly when describing ineffective change management experts. Many arrive armed with impressive frameworks yet lack the real insight needed to drive meaningful change.

If you’re selecting an organizational change management (OCM) vendor, you’re likely facing significant challenges. Here’s what makes choosing the right partner difficult—and how you can overcome these obstacles.

Why Selecting an OCM Vendor is Tough

The field is still evolving.

Change management began emerging in the early 20th century with the development of organization psychology, and Kurt Lewin’s three stage model (unfreeze-change-refreeze). It wasn’t until the 1980s and 1990s, with the rise of enterprise software like Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems, that structured change management became critical.

Because ERP touches nearly every function of a business, from finance and human resources to supply chain and operations, these sweeping implementations required disciplined, organization-wide change management that aligned with each phase of the software rollout.

Only recently have organizations seriously invested in internal OCM capabilities.

Change management is intangible.

Unlike technology implementations or capital expenditures, defining success in change management can be elusive. Should employees be happy? Should everyone agree? How do you measure employee acceptance or behavioral shifts? This intangible nature makes proving direct causation challenging.

Like branding, change management invests in outcomes that aren’t always immediately measurable. Both require belief, patience, and strategic commitment to reveal their true impact over time.

The stakes are high.

Poor change management can have severe financial and reputational consequences.

In 2024, a record 2,221 CEOs exited their roles, often due to failed strategic changes and technology misfires.

Notable examples include Unilever and Intel, both experiencing leadership turmoil and layoffs due to inadequate change management.

Common Pitfalls with Change Management Vendors

To uncover what differentiates effective OCM vendors from ineffective ones, I spoke with Patrick Gong, Senior Director of Digital Finance Transformation at The Campbell’s Company, and Cara Bilinski, a global transformation leader with over 20 years experience. They highlighted four critical pitfalls:

1. Consultant Bait-and-Switch: Firms often win contracts with senior teams but delegate actual work to inexperienced consultants. “You can get an A player or a C player from the same company, ” advises Bilinski. “You need to meet the person doing the work, not just the sales team.”
2. Technical Skills Without Behavioral Aptitude: Many consultants possess strong technical knowledge but lack essential skills in psychology, communication, and instructional design. “Most people don’t know everything—and they don’t need to,” Bilinski said. “What matters is bringing together people with deep skills who can partner, listen with empathy, and build a shared understanding.”
3. Excessive Focus on Frameworks: Firms that prioritize theoretical models without practical execution risk failing to achieve real-world readiness. Gong emphasizes, “OCM is about empathy, communication, and cultural understanding – not just methodology.”
4. Executive-Only Engagement: Effective OCM requires engaging employees at every level, not just with senior management. Gong points out, “The best consultants connect quickly and easily with the entire audience.”

Five Questions to Identify the Right Vendor

Selecting the ideal OCM vendor involves asking insightful questions—and carefully listening for red flags and reassuring signs.

1. How do you handle employee resistance?

Red flags: Focusing solely on leadership to cascade changes.

Green flags: Direct employee engagement through working sessions, feedback opportunities, and partnerships with those impacted by the change.

2. Who will actually work on our project?

Red flags: Vague assurances about senior leadership involvement.

Green flags: Specific identification of project team members and clear examples of past work.

3. How do you adapt change management frameworks?

Red flags: Rigid adherence to standard models.

Green flags: Real examples of how they have adapted to suit different industries, cultures, or leadership styles.

4. How do you ensure employee engagement?

Red flags: Over-reliance on leaders presenting messages.

Green flags: Diverse communication methods tailored to various employee groups, with tailored timing, messaging, and methods.

5. How do you assess and adapt to our company culture?

Red flags: Disregard for cultural nuances.

Green flags: Active efforts to address the organization’s unique culture, subcultures, and norms within the change strategies.

The Core Competency Check

Lastly, ask whether OCM is central to their practice or merely an add-on. A vendor serious about change management treats it as a strategic competency—not an afterthought or a loss leader.

As Patrick Gong explains, “You can’t bolt change onto a project midstream. It has to be baked in early – ideally before kickoff – because that’s when people start forming first impressions of the project.”

The Bottom Line

Effective change management isn’t about polished frameworks or flashy presentations—it’s about genuinely connecting with people. The right vendor will partner with you to win hearts and minds, driving sustainable change. Asking the right questions early ensures you find a vendor ready to do exactly that.

Effective leaders use these steps to get results.

We all know trust is the bedrock of high-performing teams, especially when they’re navigating change or uncertainty. The most prominent leadership frameworks — including transformational leadership, servant leadership, and authentic leadership — all emphasize the primacy of building trust.

Saying “we need more trust” is easy. Actually building it is hard. Too often, we know the what and the why, but we don’t quite know the how – the procedural knowledge.

Building trust requires specific skills and consistent actions.

It’s not just a fuzzy feeling; it’s a core competency of strong leadership.

So, how do we get better at doing trust?

Neuroeconomist Paul Zak offers a fantastic, practical framework. He says building trust is rooted in our brain chemistry. He studied the neurochemical oxytocin – often called the “trust molecule” because it’s linked to feelings of empathy and connection. Zak identified eight key leadership behaviors, forming the mnemonic OXYTOCIN, that actually stimulate oxytocin release and build trust:

• Ovation: Recognize excellence. Celebrate successes, big and small. Make people feel seen and appreciated.
• eXpectation: Set challenging but achievable goals. This shows you believe in your team’s capabilities.
• Yield: Give people autonomy. Let them manage how they achieve their tasks. Trust them to find the best way.
• Transfer: Enable job crafting. Allow team members to shape their roles to fit their skills and passions.
• Openness: Share information broadly and transparently. Knowledge is power; sharing it builds confidence and reduces uncertainty.
• Caring: Intentionally build relationships. Show genuine concern for team members as individuals.
• Invest: Support whole-person growth. Help your team develop personally and professionally, not just in their current job role.
• Natural: Be vulnerable and authentic. Show your own humanity; it makes it safe for others to do the same.

Here’s the crucial part: Zak found these aren’t steps to follow one by one. The real power comes from practicing these behaviors concurrently and consistently. Think of them as dials you’re constantly adjusting, not checkboxes to tick off.

Mastering these OXYTOCIN behaviors isn’t just about being a “nice” leader; it’s about effective leadership through psychological safety, collaboration, and empowerment.

The takeaway? Building trust requires more than good intentions; it requires deliberate practice and skill – the procedural knowledge of how. Start weaving these OXYTOCIN behaviors into your daily interactions. Which one will you focus on this week?

The Key to Better Decisions and Performance.

“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”

– Viktor E. Frankl

When emotions go up, intelligence goes down.

Think about the last time you were angry or doubtful. What about when you were frustrated or overwhelmed? If you’re like me, you realize your behavior probably had some room for improvement.

In school, we learn subjects like math, science, and literature. At work, we’re expected to have a basic mastery of language and technical skills. Emotion regulation is never a required course.

Instead, we learn to regulate our emotions through trial and error, often developing adaptive behaviors that might not serve who we want to be or how we want to show up at work. And, when we get it wrong, the consequences ripple — through our decision-making, creativity, and relationships.

I fired off that email too soon.

I didn’t see the opportunity that could have made the project outcome better.

I opted out of that development experience because of fear.

I resisted career-changing feedback.

I said something hurtful out of frustration.

I let the conflict escalate.

Do you ever have thoughts like that? Managing our emotions skillfully in these situations shouldn’t be an afterthought; it should be the first tool we use to help ourselves and our teams succeed.

The good news? Emotion regulation is a skill that can be learned, practiced, and strengthened over time so we’re better equipped to perform at our best.

The basics of emotion regulation include:

• Recognizing that an emotion is present – biologically and psychologically.
• Naming the emotion without judgment.
• Practicing the pause between emotion and action.
• Reframing emotions as packets of information.
• Deploying the right tool (stillness, movement, reflection) to return to balance.
• Choosing to learn from our emotions.

When we practice emotion regulation, we start to enjoy these benefits:

• Clearer thinking, which leads to better decisions.
• Improved creativity, which leads to innovation.
• More connected relationships, which lead to higher engagement.

What’s interesting is that we assume people should know how to do this. But we wouldn’t expect someone to know how to code in Python, would we? We’d provide them with instruction, use cases, lab time to learn, and grace for mistakes. We owe it to our people to do the same when it comes to this essential workplace skill. If we took emotion regulation as seriously as we do technical skills, we might just create those high-performing cultures we seek.

Lessons from The Lord of the Rings.

Leadership often finds us when we least expect it. It isn’t always about seeking power or standing in the spotlight. Sometimes, the most effective leaders are the ones who step forward reluctantly but rise to the challenge with courage and determination.

One of the most iconic examples of such leadership comes from J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, and his character, Frodo Baggins.

In my role as a Change Management Manager, I’ve seen individuals who remind me of Frodo. They step into leadership not because they crave it, but because they are trusted to carry the weight of change.

Frodo’s Leadership Lessons

1. Value courage over confidence.
   Frodo’s leadership begins with uncertainty. Frodo isn’t the strongest member of the Fellowship; his strength is his willingness to take the first step, even though the path is unclear. Leadership requires the bravery to move forward, even when the outcome is uncertain.
2. Surround yourself with allies.
   Frodo’s strength comes from the Fellowship, especially Sam, who supports him when the burden becomes too heavy. The quest would have failed if not for everyone playing their roles, according to their strengths. Great leaders build strong, diverse teams. 
3. Humility is a strength.
   Frodo’s humility keeps him focused on the mission, not personal glory. In fact, other characters disqualify themselves from leadership based on their desire for power. Effective leadership is about service and authenticity. 
4. Leaders serve the greater good.
   Frodo’s journey is isolating and grueling, but his commitment to the greater purpose keeps him going. Leadership often involves sacrifice and perseverance.

Connecting Fiction to Reality

Frodo’s journey mirrors real-world leadership, especially in change management. Driving through uncertainty, rallying teams, staying humble, and focusing on the goal despite hardship are critical to driving progress. Reluctant leaders often excel because they lead with authenticity, care, and purpose.

What is your One Ring, and how will you carry it? By embracing leadership with courage and humility, you’ll inspire others to follow.

Part 2: The “How Do We Feel” Conversation.

A while back, we shared our first blog post on the book Supercommunicators by Charles Duhigg. It focused on Part 1: The What’s This Really About Conversation. Here are our thoughts on Part 2: The How Do We Feel Conversation.

Duhigg tells us that every conversation is, in some way, about how we feel.

Every conversation is shaped by emotions.

So, no matter what you’re trying to achieve, the “how we feel” component is essential.

Why should we be emotional Supercommunicators?

Duhigg explains that emotional intelligence is a “form of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions.” This type of intelligence allows us to:

• Recognize and name our own emotions.
• Regulate our emotions and influence the emotions of those around us.
• Employ perspective-taking.
• Build relationships with colleagues.
• Use our emotional skills to grow.

Lest we think this is all too “touchy feely” for work, Duhigg weaves together lessons, significant research studies, and impactful case studies from the past 40+ years to demonstrate the importance and impact of these skills.  A few examples:

1. Ahead of the international space station launch, NASA worked to redefine the criteria for “what makes a good astronaut” to include emotional intelligence.
2. A University of Chicago psychology professor taught listening and vulnerability skills at a conference of Wall Street and hedge fund professionals.
3. A group of civic organizations brought opposing sides of the gun control debate to explore how to connect during conflict.

These examples get professionals past small talk, technical expertise, and who shouts the loudest or shames the greatest, and teaches them to meet in the right place to connect with others and do their best work.

Are you an emotional Supercommunicator?

• Do you ask deep questions? Remember to ask questions that:
  • Draw out someone’s values, beliefs, judgments, or experiences, not just facts.
  • Invite people to talk about how they feel, describe specific emotions, or empathize.

• Do you listen? Confirm your understanding by restating what you’ve heard. And remember, showing that you understand doesn’t mean you agree.
• Are you fostering reciprocity? As others share their vulnerabilities, share something about yourself as well. Acknowledge the other person’s emotions and show them you care. Respond to the other’s needs.
• Do you make room for laughter? Lighten up! Laughter shows we have heard the other person and that we want to connect with them. Duhigg says, “Laughter, and other nonlinguistic expressions such as gasps and sighs, or smiles and frowns, are embodiments of the matching principle…”
• How good are you at interpreting nonverbals? Duhigg says Supercommunicators are good at detecting how others feel based on the energy in their gestures, the volume of their voices, the speed and cadence of their speech, and the affect they carry.
• Are you making conversations psychologically safe? Show genuine interest and listen actively. The safer someone feels, the more they are willing to trust, share, and reveal vulnerabilities.

How do Supercommunicators handle tough conversations?

Becoming a Supercommunicator doesn’t guarantee conflict-free, comfortable communication. It doesn’t promise a newfound ease with disagreements. Rather, we approach conflict differently:

• Shift the goal to understanding why the conflict exists, rather than focusing on winning or wounding.
• Recognize that the conflict has multiple parts: the surface issue at the center of the disagreement, and the emotional conflict underneath.
• Reframe the idea of control. Rather than controlling the other person, focus on controlling yourself: your impact on the setting and your focus in the conversation.
• Make room for emotion. Emotions are there, whether or not you choose to acknowledge and use them. If you don’t, they “leak out” and have unintended effects on your conversations and relationships.

Supercommunicating is aptly named. It really is a superpower you can deploy in any social or professional situation. It’s about knowing what kind of conversation is happening, how the participants are feeling, and how to draw out what really matters to all involved.