Getting Granular on Leadership Development

In the quest to develop effective leaders, many organizations fall into the trap of generalization—relying on broad training programs that touch the surface but miss the core. Real, lasting growth requires more than exposure to theory or traditional best practices. It demands a deep understanding of the architecture of competency—the combination of abilities and characteristics that drive performance.

The 5 Elements of Competency: A Framework for Precision

A competency isn’t a single attribute; it’s a system composed of interrelated elements:

• Behaviors – Observable actions in specific situations (e.g., showing empathy)

• Traits – Consistently displayed personality characteristics (e.g., a strong work ethic)

• Drivers – Internal motivations that influence traits and behaviors (e.g., the role modeling that shaped one’s work ethic)

  Skills – Acquired knowledge and procedures used to complete tasks

• CMP (Complexity of Mental Processing) – How well an individual can think critically and analytically to process information, recognize patterns, and solve complex problems

These elements align with role requirements across all organizational levels, providing a comprehensive framework for talent identification and development.

Seven Leadership Competencies That Differentiate Top Talent

Through benchmarking against global best practices, we’ve identified seven differentiator competencies consistently demonstrated by high-performing leaders.

Mapping Leadership Competencies to What Drives Them

Mapping these differentiating competencies to influencing behaviors—and identifying their underlying drivers—creates a precise framework for guiding all talent development initiatives.

For example, Analytical Thinking—a critical differentiator in complex decision-making—is often misdiagnosed as a training or knowledge gap. Deeper analysis frequently reveals a shortfall in Complexity of Mental Processing (CMP): the cognitive ability to manage ambiguity, synthesize information, and anticipate second- and third-order consequences.

This type of gap cannot be resolved with surface-level interventions. It is often intrinsic and best identified during selection or role-alignment.

From Insight to Action: Using Assessments to Drive Development

Once competencies are defined and mapped, assessing current talent is the next step. For one client’s management team, a recent 360° assessment revealed a telling pattern of interpersonal and problem-solving challenges:

• Dismisses others' opinions

• Weak in encouraging dialogue

• Communication often perceived as challenging

• Limited recognition of others’ contributions

• Failed to provide solutions when problems were escalated

  
  

Competency Gaps in Focus

A subsequent assessment of leadership competencies revealed clear gaps between current behaviors and benchmarked expectations:

These results present the findings of a recent competency assessment of a client management group, highlighting key gaps between current performance levels and established benchmark expectations. The percentages reflect how the group performed relative to the benchmark, categorized as high, medium, or low alignment.

Looking Beneath the Surface

Most leadership programs fail because they stop at behaviors—yet behavior is the symptom, not the cause.

A deeper assessment of the same group’s emotional intelligence (EQ)—the driver behind these behaviors—revealed low scores in:

• Empathy

• Interpersonal Relationships

• Emotional Self-Awareness

These results present the findings of an emotional intelligence (EQ) assessment conducted on the same management group. The negative percentages indicate deviations from a professional manager benchmark (P-Pop) standardized at 100.

Additionally, cognitive profiling exposed a second gap: reduced capacity in Analytical Thinking. The team struggled with processing interdependencies, evaluating competing priorities, and applying structured reasoning under pressure—classic indicators of insufficient CMP for the complexity of their roles.

Organizational levels demand varying degrees of analytical thinking and problem-solving—the higher the level, the broader the scope and the greater the complexity of issues to be addressed.

This insight changed the game. Rather than defaulting to generic leadership training that often overlooks root issues, the organization designed learning experiences that directly targeted emotional intelligence (EQ)—building empathy, enhancing interpersonal effectiveness—and, where appropriate, reconsidered role fit for managers whose problem-solving capacity fell short of their roles’ complexity.

The Bottom Line: Match Capability to Complexity

Effective leadership development isn’t just about teaching new skills—it’s about aligning emotional and cognitive capabilities with role demands. By diagnosing gaps precisely and addressing both EQ and CMP, organizations build leaders who are not only more self-aware and relationally effective but also better equipped to solve complex problems and drive performance.

In a world of rising complexity, the best organizations aren’t just training leaders—they’re engineering fit.