During our research for the book Talent Readiness-The Future is Now, our findings indicated that those in the CSuite want to see a fundamental change in how the most senior leaders are developed at the enterprise level.
What became abundantly clear during our research was that the current model for the HR function where Talent Management is at least 2 if not 3 levels down from the CSuite and with enterprise wide role architecture is suboptimal.
This has led the Discussion Partner consultants to the conclusion that the current organization model in Human Resources impairs innovation, accountability, and sustainability for Leadership Effectiveness at the highest level of an organization.
To have a dedicated HR function for the most senior levels of an organization is not new. General Electric and many other organizations have dedicated resources for the “Top 200”. Essentially this approach focuses mostly on the high potentials possibly to the exclusion of B players, in critical roles or assigned mission essential projects.
Our point of view is there needs to be a more generous interpretation of this effort, one that requires a new title, reporting relationship, role architecture, and competency.
Our model for consideration aligns in the following way.
Chief Leadership Effectiveness Officer (CLEO)
Direct Line-Board of Directors
- Succession Planning Top 3 Levels
- Recruitment/Replenishment Top 3 Levels
- Development Strategy Top 3 Levels
- Executive Compensation Strategy and Administration Top 3 Levels
- Workforce/Continuity Planning Enterprise Wide
- Thought Leadership Facilitated Access-Board, CEO and CEO Direct Reports(facilitate access to thought leaders for education/edification purposes
- 1. Strategic Planning Expertise
- 2. Executive Coaching/Facilitation Experience
- 3. Leadership Assessment Orientation(not necessarily Practitioner)
- 4. Working Knowledge of Executive Compensation Strategy and Programs
- 5. Thought Leadership Credentials(writing, academia, other)
One could reasonable assert the following two viewpoints:
1) These Positions Exist in HR Already-True….but our point of view as to focus the importance of this effort it should be out of HR for practical reasons
2) The credentials of this role exist: but among various incumbents-True again….but our point is that having this body of expertise and outlook resident in one senior position optimizes effectiveness
The hypothesis of the Discussion Partner consultancy is the time to debate the upgrading of heretofore sub processes into one role is timely.