Training Leadership

The Critical Need for Continuous Leadership Training

When organizations design their training programs, they often focus heavily on onboarding new hires and developing entry-level employees. This makes intuitive sense: new workers need to learn company systems, understand their roles, and build foundational skills. However, this approach overlooks a crucial reality: the people who have the greatest impact on organizational success, culture, and employee retention are often the ones receiving the least training.

Managers, executives, and other leaders don't stop needing development the moment they earn a promotion. In fact, their need for continuous learning becomes more critical as their influence expands. Yet globally, organizations invest an estimated $60 billion annually in leadership development, with workplace application of learning typically low and many programs underperforming or failing, resulting in wasted time and money (Geerts et al., 2024). Many companies operate under the assumption that leadership skills are innate or that reaching a management position means you've already learned everything you need to know. This assumption is not only incorrect but costly.

The Ripple Effect of Untrained Leadership

A poorly trained manager doesn't just affect their own performance. Their impact ripples outward, influencing team morale, productivity, retention rates, and ultimately the bottom line. Research consistently shows that people don't leave companies—they leave managers. A Gallup poll of more than 1 million employed U.S. workers concluded that the number one reason people quit their jobs is a bad boss or immediate supervisor, with 75% of workers who voluntarily left their jobs doing so because of their bosses and not the position itself (Gallup, n.d.). Furthermore, according to Gallup's research, 70% of the factors that contribute to employee happiness at work are directly related to their manager (Gallup, n.d.).

Consider what happens when a manager is promoted based on technical expertise alone, without receiving training in people management. They may excel at the work itself but struggle to delegate, develop others, or create psychological safety within their team. Their direct reports become frustrated, disengaged, or overwhelmed. Talented employees start looking elsewhere. The manager, sensing things aren't working but unsure why, becomes stressed and defensive. Studies show that 52% of exiting employees say their manager could have done something to prevent them from leaving their job(Gallup, n.d.). The organization loses both productivity and people.

The Evidence for Leadership Training Effectiveness

Despite organizational skepticism about training investments, meta-analytic research analyzing data from 335 independent samples demonstrates that leadership training is substantially more effective than previously thought, leading to improvements in reactions, learning, transfer of skills to the workplace, and organizational results(Lacerenza et al., 2017). After undergoing leadership training, participants were found to have a 25% increase in learning and 20% in overall job performance. The participants also exhibited a 28% increase in leadership behaviors and an 8% climb in subordinate performance (Geerts et al., 2024).

These findings are particularly significant because they demonstrate that trained leaders don't just improve their own performance—they elevate their entire teams. Positive changes in employee knowledge and behavior may trickle down to affect subordinate performance or trickle up to change organizational norms, as a sales leader who undergoes training may increase their subordinates' performance and may provide other leaders with normative examples of effective performance behaviors (Lacerenza et al., 2017).

The Changing Landscape Demands Continuous Learning

The workplace is not static. Employment laws evolve. Technology transforms how we work. Social movements reshape expectations around equity and inclusion. Remote and hybrid work models require new approaches to team management. Economic pressures demand different strategies. Mental health awareness changes how we support employees.

Leaders who received management training five or ten years ago learned in a different world. Without ongoing development, they operate with outdated playbooks, applying yesterday's solutions to today's challenges. This gap between their training and current reality leaves them ill-equipped to guide their teams effectively.

Organizations that fail to keep their leadership current on policy changes create additional risks. When new harassment prevention protocols are implemented, new data privacy regulations take effect, or updated performance management systems launch, leaders need thorough training. They're the ones who must interpret these changes for their teams, answer questions, and ensure compliance. Half-informed managers become liability risks, inadvertently violating policies or providing incorrect guidance that creates legal exposure for the company.

Building Skills That Matter

Effective leadership requires a complex set of skills that develop over time with practice and reflection. Emotional intelligence, conflict resolution, strategic thinking, inclusive leadership, change management, and coaching abilities—these competencies don't emerge fully formed. They require cultivation through training, feedback, and real-world application.

Meta-analytic research indicates that general management skills such as goal-setting, performance appraisal, and time management, along with interpersonal skills like listening, questioning, negotiating, and mentoring, seem to transfer best to leader behavior (Burke & Day, 1986). However, developing these capabilities requires more than a single training session. Many organizations provide one-time management training when someone is first promoted, then consider the job done. But leadership development works like any other skill acquisition: it requires repetition, refinement, and ongoing challenge.

Given the contextual and adaptive nature of leadership, which normally takes place in dynamic and complex environments, different approaches are more effective in some circumstances than others (Geerts et al., 2024). A single workshop on giving feedback doesn't create a skilled coach. One session on diversity and inclusion doesn't eliminate unconscious bias. Real growth happens through sustained engagement with these topics over time.

Progressive companies recognize that leadership development is an ongoing journey, not a destination. They create learning pathways that evolve with a leader's growing responsibilities. They offer advanced training for experienced managers. They bring in external expertise to challenge internal thinking. They create peer learning communities where leaders can share challenges and solutions. They invest in executive coaching for senior leaders who face unique pressures and complex decisions.

Multifaceted interventions with experiential components, coupled with structured on-the-job learning, are becoming more common and are more effective than traditional lecture formats (Geerts et al., 2024). Organizations serious about developing their leaders should incorporate practice, real-world application, and continuous feedback into their training approaches.

The ROI of Leadership Investment

Some organizations resist investing in leadership training due to cost concerns or the belief that management should simply "figure it out." This perspective ignores the substantial return on investment that well-trained leadership provides.

Research shows there is a direct link between training and reduced turnover rates, with almost 94% of employees indicating they would stay at a company for longer if it provided opportunities to learn and grow (LinkedIn Learning, 2019). Effective managers retain talent, reducing the enormous costs of turnover and recruitment. According to research, replacing an employee who leaves can cost an organization up to two times that employee's yearly salary. They identify and develop future leaders from within, reducing reliance on expensive external hires. They create high-performing teams that deliver better results. They navigate challenges smoothly rather than creating expensive problems through mismanagement.

Retention rates rise 30-50% for companies with strong learning cultures (Association for Talent Development, 2016). Furthermore, 86% of millennials would be kept from leaving their current position if training and development were offered by their employer (Bridge, 2017). The cost of not training leaders is far higher than the investment required to develop them. A single discrimination lawsuit, wrongful termination claim, or hostile workplace complaint can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, not to mention reputational damage.

Making Leadership Development a Priority

Despite the number of organizations devoted to leadership training and evidence suggesting that organizational funds spent on leadership training are increasing over time, organizations continue to report a lack of leadership skills among their employees, with only 13% of organizations believing they have done a quality job training their leaders (Collins & Holton, 2004). This disconnect suggests that the issue isn't whether to invest in leadership development, but how to do it effectively.

Organizations serious about developing their leaders need to move beyond checkbox training. Moderator analyses support the use of needs analysis, feedback, multiple delivery methods, especially practice, spaced training sessions, on-site location, and face-to-face delivery (Lacerenza et al., 2017). This means creating comprehensive, ongoing development programs that address both foundational skills and emerging challenges. It means regularly updating leaders on policy changes, industry trends, and best practices. It means measuring the effectiveness of leadership training and holding leaders accountable for applying what they learn.

It also means recognizing that different leadership levels need different development. Frontline managers need skills for daily team guidance and operational execution. Mid-level managers need strategic thinking and cross-functional collaboration abilities. Senior executives need vision-setting capabilities and complex stakeholder management skills. Each level deserves targeted investment.

Companies should also create cultures where continuous learning is expected and valued at all levels. When senior executives visibly engage in their own development, attend training, and discuss what they're learning, it signals that growth doesn't stop with seniority. Leadership development is most effective when understood as a key component of talent optimization, alongside other complementary functions including talent acquisition, integration, motivation, performance validation, and succession planning (Geerts et al., 2024). When leadership development is woven into promotion criteria and performance evaluations, it becomes part of the organizational DNA rather than an afterthought.

Conclusion

The assumption that leadership skills are static or that training is only for entry-level employees is a costly mistake. The people guiding your teams, shaping your culture, and executing your strategy need continuous investment in their development. They need updated knowledge about policies and regulations. They need refined skills for an evolving workplace. They need support in navigating increasingly complex challenges.

Organizations that treat leadership development as an ongoing priority rather than a one-time event create competitive advantages. They build stronger cultures, retain better talent, achieve superior results, and navigate change more effectively. Companies globally invested $370.3 billion in leadership training in 2019, with $169.4 billion coming from North America, yet despite this significant investment, many organizations still fail to meet leadership standards(Geerts et al., 2024). The question isn't whether companies can afford to train their leaders continuously. It's whether they can afford not to—and whether they're training them effectively enough to see real results.

References

Association for Talent Development. (2016). 2016 state of the industry report. ATD Press.

Bridge. (2017). The millennial leadership survey. https://www.yourbridge.org

Burke, M. J., & Day, R. R. (1986). A cumulative study of the effectiveness of managerial training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 232–245. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.2.232

Collins, D. B., & Holton, E. F., III. (2004). The effectiveness of managerial leadership development programs: A meta-analysis of studies from 1982 to 2001. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15(2), 217–248. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1099

Day, D. V. (2000). Leadership development: A review in context. Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 581–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(00)00061-8

Gallup. (n.d.). State of the American manager: Analytics and advice for leaders. Gallup, Inc.

Geerts, J. M., Goodall, A. H., & Agius, S. (2024). Maximizing the impact and ROI of leadership development: A theory- and evidence-informed framework. Behavioral Sciences, 14(10), 955. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14100955

Lacerenza, C. N., Reyes, D. L., Marlow, S. L., Joseph, D. L., & Salas, E. (2017). Leadership training design, delivery, and implementation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102 (12), 1686–1718. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000241

LinkedIn Learning. (2019). 2019 workplace learning report. LinkedIn Corporation.

Taylor, P. J., Russ-Eft, D. F., & Chan, D. W. L. (2005). A meta-analytic review of behavior modeling training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 692–709. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.692