The Leadership Pipeline - By Ram Charan - Sharing his Book Excerpt

 

 

 

The six turns in the pipeline that we’ll discuss here are major events in the life of a leader. They represent significant passages that can ’ t be mastered in a day or by taking a course. Our goal here is to help you become familiar with the skills, time applications, and work values demanded by each passage, as well as this particular leadership gestalt. Once you grasp what these passages entail and the challenges involved in making each leadership transition, you’ll be in a better position to use this information to unclog your organization ’ s leadership pipeline and facilitate your own growth as a leader. Going through these passages helps leaders build emotional strength as they take on tasks of increasing complexity and scope. The following six chapters will provide you with ideas and tools to achieve full performance at all leadership levels in your organization.

As you read about each passage, you’ll naturally apply it to your own organization and may question how we’ve defined and divided each turn in the pipeline. The odds are that you’ll immediately think of at least one (and probably more) leadership transitions that apply to your own company that we have not addressed in the Leadership Pipeline model. While there certainly are other transitions, they are too small or incomplete to qualify as a major passage.

Six Leadership Passages

An Overview

For instance, many global companies have business general managers at the country level and regional executives with responsibility for several countries. These regional executives report to a person with a title such as global consumer products head. Although this global consumer products head manages group managers (the regional executives, in this case), she isn’t an enterprise manager, because she reports to a CEO or president and has little accountability for total corporate profit - and - loss matters. For our purposes here, we would categorize her as a group manager, even though she may have responsibility for other group managers.

Similarly, you may wonder why the transition from team member to team leader isn’t worthy of its own passage. First, this is usually a subset of Passage One (from managing self to managing others). Second, team leaders frequently lack the decision - making authority on selection and rewards that fi rst - line managers receive.

Third, team leaders usually focus on technical or professional matters (getting a project or program completed) and aren’t tested in more general management areas.

Each organization is unique, and each probably has at least one leadership passage with distinctive aspects. It ’ s likely, however, that you can fit that distinctive passage into one of our six passages.

As you become more attuned to each of them, we believe you’ll see how they apply to your own situation and organization. If there is a passage in your business that doesn’t fi t our model, create your own definition of the transition and tell us about it.

Passage One: From Managing Self to Managing Others

New, young employees usually spend their first few years with an organization as individual contributors. Whether they’re in sales, accounting, engineering, or marketing, their skill requirements are primarily technical or professional. They contribute by doing the assigned work within given time frames and in ways that meet objectives. By sharpening and broadening their individual skills, they make increased contributions and are then considered “promotable” by organizations. From a time application standpoint, the learning involves planning (so that work is completed on time), punctuality, content, quality, and reliability. The work values to be developed include acceptance of the company culture and adopting of professional standards. When people become skilled individual contributors who produce good results — especially when they demonstrate an ability to collaborate with others — they usually receive additional responsibilities. When they demonstrate an ability to handle these responsibilities and adhere to the company’s values, they are often promoted to first - line manager.

When this happens, they are at Passage One.

Though this might seem like an easy, natural leadership passage, it’s one where people often trip. The highest - performing people, especially, are reluctant to change; they want to keep doing the activities that made them successful. As a result, people make the job transition from individual contributor to manager without making a behavioral or value - based transition. In effect, they become managers without accepting the requirements. Many consultants, for instance, have skipped this turn, moving from transitory team leadership to business leader without absorbing much of the learning in between. The result, when business leaders miss this passage, is frequently disaster.

The skills people should learn at this first leadership passage include planning work, filling jobs, assigning work, motivating, coaching, and measuring the work of others. First - time managers need to learn how to reallocate their time so that they not only complete their assigned work but also help others perform effectively.

They cannot allocate all of their time to putting out fires, seizing opportunities, and handling tasks themselves. They must shift from “doing” work to getting work done through others.

Reallocating time is an especially difficult transitional requirement for first - time managers. Part of the problem is that many neophyte managers still prefer to spend time on their “ old ” work, even as they take charge of a group. Yet the pressure to spend less time on individual work and more time on managing will increase at each passage, and if people don’t start making changes in how they allocate their time from the beginning, they’re bound to become liabilities as they move up. It ’ s a major reason why pipelines clog and leaders fail.

The most difficult change for managers to make at Passage One, however, involves values. Specifically, they need to learn to value managerial work rather than just tolerate it. They must believe that making time for others, planning, coaching, and the like are necessary tasks and are their responsibility. More than that, they must view this other - directed work as mission - critical to their success. For instance, first - line knowledge managers in the financial services industry find this transition extremely difficult. They value being producers, and they must learn to value making others productive. Given that these values had nothing to do with their success as individual contributors, it’s difficult for them to make this dramatic shift in what they view as meaningful.

While changes in skills and time applications can be seen and measured, changes in values are more difficult to assess. Someone may appear as though he ’ s making the changes demanded by this leadership turn but in fact be adhering to individual - contributor values. Value changes will take place only if upper management reinforces the need to shift beliefs and if people find they ’ re successful at their new jobs after a value shift.

 

Passage Two: From Managing Others to Managing Managers

 

This leadership passage is frequently ignored, especially relative to the previous passage (where the transition to new responsibilities is more obvious). Few companies address this passage directly in their training, even though this is the level where a company’s management foundation is constructed; level - two managers select and develop the people who will eventually become the company’s leaders.

Perhaps the biggest difference from the previous passage is that here, managers must be pure management. Before, individual contributions were still part of their job description. Now they need to divest themselves of individual tasks. The key skills that must be mastered during this transition include selecting people to turn

Passage One, assigning managerial and leadership work to them, measuring their progress as managers, and coaching them. This is also the point where managers must begin to think beyond their function and concern themselves with strategic issues that support the overall business.

All this is difficult to do if a given manager at this passage still values individual contributions and functional work to the exclusion of everything else. Too often, people who have been promoted to manager-of-manager positions have skipped Passage One; they were promoted to first-line managers but didn’t change skills, time applications, or work values. As a result, they clog the leadership pipeline because they hold first - line managers accountable for technical work rather than managerial work. Because they themselves skipped the first passage and still value individual contributions above managerial ones, they poison the managerial well.

They help maintain and even instill the wrong values in those individuals who report to them. They choose high technical achievers for first - line managerial spots rather than true potential leaders; they are unable to differentiate between those who can do and those who can lead.

Managers at Passage Two need to be able to identify value-based resistance to managerial work, which is a common reaction among first - line managers. They need to recognize that the software designer who would rather design software than manage others cannot be allowed to move up to leadership work. No matter how brilliant he might be at software design, he will become an obstacle in the leadership pipeline if he derives no job satisfaction from managing and leading people. In fact, one of the tough responsibilities of managers of managers is to return people to individual - contributor roles if first - line managers don’t shift their behaviors and values.

Coaching is also essential at this level because first - line managers frequently don’t receive formal training in how to be a manager; they’re dependent on their bosses to instruct them on the job.

Coaching requires time—they need to go through the instruction - performance - feedback cycle with their people repeatedly before lessons sink in — and some managers aren’t willing to reallocate their time in this way. In many organizations, coaching ability isn’t rewarded (and the lack of it isn’t penalized). It ’ s no wonder that relatively few managers view coaching as mission - critical.

Passage Three: From Managing Managers to Functional Manager

 

This transition is tougher than it seems.

While on the surface the difference between managing managers and functional management might appear negligible, a number of significant challenges lurk below the surface. Communication with the individual- contributor level now requires penetrating at least two layers of management, thus mandating development of new communication skills. What is just as significant, functional heads must manage some areas that are outside their own experiences. This means they must not only endeavor to understand this “foreign” work but also learn to value it.

At the same time, functional managers report to multifunctional general managers and therefore have to become skilled at taking other functional concerns and needs into consideration.

Two major transitional skills are team play with other functional managers and competition for resources based on business needs.

At the same time, managers at this turn should become proficient strategists, not only for their function but also for blending their functional strategy with the overall business strategy. From a time - application standpoint, this means participating in business team meetings and working with other functional managers. All this takes away from time spent on purely functional responsibilities, thus making it essential that functional managers delegate responsibility for overseeing many functional tasks to direct reports.

This leadership passage requires an increase in managerial maturity. In one sense, maturity means thinking and acting like a functional leader rather than a functional member. But it also means that managers need to adopt a broad, long - term perspective.

Long - term strategy, such as state - of - the - art, futuristic thinking for their function, is usually what gives most managers trouble here.

At this level, their leadership entails creating functional strategy that enables them to do something better than the competition.

Whether it’s coming up with a method to design more innovative products or devising a way to reach new customer groups, these managers must push the functional envelope. They must also push it into the future, looking for a sustainable competitive advantage rather than just an immediate but temporary edge.

Passage Four: From Functional Manager to Business Manager

This leadership passage is often the most satisfying as well as the most challenging of a manager’s career, and it’s mission-critical in organizations. Business mangers usually receive significant autonomy, which people with leadership instincts find liberating. They also are able to see a clear link between their efforts and marketplace results. At the same time, this is a sharp turn; it requires a major shift in skills, time applications, and work values. It’s not simply a matter of people becoming more strategic and cross-functional in their thinking (though it ’ s important to continue developing the abilities rooted in the previous level). Now they are in charge of integrating functions, whereas before they simply had to understand and work with other functions. But the biggest shift is from looking at plans and proposals functionally (Can we do it technically, professionally, or physically?) to a profit perspective (Will we make any money if we do this?) and to a long-term view (Is the profitability result sustainable?). New business managers must change the way they think in order to be successful.

There are probably more new and unfamiliar responsibilities there than at other levels. For people who have been in only one function for their entire career, a business manager position represents unexplored territory; they must suddenly become responsible for many unfamiliar functions and outcomes. Not only do they have to learn to manage different functions, but they also need to become skilled at working with a wider variety of people than ever before; they need to become more sensitive to functional diversity issues and communicating clearly and effectively. Even more difficult is the balancing act between future goals and present needs and making trade-offs between the two. Business managers must meet quarterly profit, market share, product, and people targets, and at the same time plan for goals three to five years into the future. The paradox of balancing short-term and long-term thinking is one that bedevils many managers at this turn — and why one of the requirements here is for thinking time.

At this level, managers need to stop doing every second of the day and reserve time for reflection and analysis.

When business managers don ’ t make this turn fully, the leadership pipeline quickly becomes clogged. For example, a common failure at this level is not valuing (or not effectively using) staff functions. Directing and energizing finance, human resources, legal, and other support groups are crucial business manager  responsibilities.

When business managers don’t make this turn fully, the leadership pipeline quickly becomes clogged. For example, a common failure at this level is not valuing (or not effectively using) staff functions. Directing and energizing finance, human resources, legal, and other support groups are crucial business manager responsibilities. When managers don’t understand or appreciate the contribution of support staff, these staff people don’t deliver full performance.

When managers don't understand or appreciate the contribution of support staff, these staff people don’t deliver full performance. When the leader of the business demeans or di les, staff people deliver halfhearted efforts; they can easily become energy - drainers. Business managers must learn to trust, accept advice, and receive feedback from all functional managers, even though they may never have experienced these functions personally.

Passage Five: From Business Manager to Group Manager

This is another leadership passage that at first glance doesn’t seem overly arduous. The assumption is that if you can run one business successfully, you can do the same with two or more businesses. The flaw in this reasoning begins with what is valued at each leadership level. A business manager values the success of his own business.

A group manager values the success of other people’ businesses.

This is a critical distinction because some people only derive satisfaction when they’re the ones receiving the lion’s share of the credit. As you might imagine, a group manager who doesn’t value the success of others will fail to inspire and support the performance of the business managers who report to him. Or his actions might be dictated by his frustration; he’s convinced he could operate the various businesses better than any of his managers and wishes he could be doing so. In either instance, the leadership pipeline becomes clogged with business managers who aren’t operating at peak capacity because they’re not being properly supported or their authority is being usurped.

This level also requires a critical shift in four skill sets.

First, group managers must become proficient at evaluating strategy for capital allocation and deployment purposes.

This is a sophisticated business skill that involves learning to ask the right questions, analyze the right data, and apply the right corporate perspective to understand which strategy has the greatest probability of success and therefore should be funded

 

The second skill cluster involves development of business managers.

As part of this development, group managers need to know which of the function managers are ready to become business managers. Coaching new business managers is also an important role for this level.

The third skill set has to do with portfolio strategy.

This is quite different from business strategy and demands a perceptual shift.

This is the first time managers have to ask these questions:

Do I have the right collection of businesses?

What businesses should be added, subtracted, or changed to position us properly and ensure current and future earnings?

Fourth, group managers must become astute about assessing whether they have the right core capabilities. This means avoiding wishful thinking and instead taking a hard, objective look at their range of resources and making a judgment based on analysis and experience.

Leadership becomes more holistic at this level.

People may master the required skills, but they won’t perform at full leadership capacity if they don’t begin to see themselves as broad-gauged executives. By broad-gauged, we mean that managers need to factor in the complexities of running multiple businesses, thinking in terms of community, industry, government, and ceremonial activities. They must also prepare themselves for the bigger decisions, greater risks and uncertainties, and longer time spans that are inherent to this leadership level. They must always be cognizant of what Wall Street wants them to achieve in terms of the financial scorecard. Group managers can’t take a specialist mentality into a realm that mandates holistic thinking. They need to evolve their perspective to the point that they see issues in the broadest possible terms.

We should also point out that some smaller companies don’t have a group manager passage.

In these companies, CEOs usually undertake a group manager ’ s responsibilities.

Passage Six: From Group Manager to Enterprise Manager

 

When the leadership pipeline becomes clogged at the top, it negatively affects all leadership levels. A CEO who has skipped one or more passages can diminish the performance of not only the managers who report directly to him but also individuals all the way down the line. Such a CEO not only fails to develop other managers effectively but also doesn’t fulfill the responsibilities that come with this position.

The transition during the sixth passage is much more focused on values than on skills.

To an even greater extent than at the previous level, people must reinvent their self-concept as an enterprise manager. As leaders of an institution, they must be long-term, visionary thinkers. At the same time, they must develop operating mechanisms to know and drive quarter - by - quarter performance that is in tune with longer-term strategy. The trade-offs involved can be mind - bending, and enterprise leaders learn to value these trade - offs. In addition, this new leadership role often requires well-developed external sensitivity and the ability to manage external constituencies, sense significant external shifts, and do something about them proactively (rather than reactively).

Again, CEOs value this outward - looking perspective.

Enterprise leaders need to come to terms with the fact that their performance as a CEO will be based on three or four high-leverage decisions annually; they must set these three or four mission critical priorities and focus on them. There’ s a subtle but fundamental shift in responsibility from strategic to visionary thinking and from an operations to a global perspective. There’s also a “letting go” process that should take place during this passage if it hasn’t taken place previously. Enterprise leaders must let go of the pieces — that is, the individual products and customers—and focus on the whole (How well do we conceive, develop, produce, and market all products to all customers?).

Finally, at this level a CEO must assemble a team of high-achieving and ambitious direct reports, knowing that some of them want his job and picking them for the team despite this knowledge.

This is also the only leadership position in the organization for which inspiring the entire employee population through a variety of communication tools is essential.

Leadership pipeline problems occur at this level for two common reasons:

• CEOs are often unaware that this is a significant  passage that requires changes in values.

• It ’ s difficult to develop a CEO for this particular leadership transition.

In terms of the latter, preparation for the chief executive position is the result of a series of diverse experiences over a long time.

The best developmental approach provides carefully selected job assignments that stretch people over time and allow them to learn and practice necessary skills. Though coaching may be helpful as an adjunct to this development process, people usually need time, experience, and the right assignments to develop into effective CEOs.

The former point is a matter of will and conscious effort. We’ve seen too many CEOs fail because they didn’t view this leadership turn as a necessary one to make—or to make fully. They sustain the same skills, time applications, and work values that served them well as group managers and never adjust their self concept to fit their new leadership role. They behave as though they are running a portfolio of businesses, not one entity.

Adapting the Model to Small Business Requirements

This model was built primarily in large organizations, but we have used it successfully in medium - sized and small companies with as few as twenty employees). Essentially, this model reflects the hierarchy of work that exists in any company. Even small companies grow into this hierarchy as they become successful.

We ’ d like to summarize how the model applies to smaller, growing organizations.

In a small company with fewer than twenty people, the only real leadership passage is a variation on our first one: from managing self to owner (instead of managing others).

This owner - founder usually has to move from individual contributor to manager of other people.

After designing a product or creating a service that is successful, she must hire more people, and thus begins this leadership passage. If the business is to survive, she must learn, allow time for, and value skills such as coaching, planning, and rewarding employees. If she doesn’t, people will either quit or (even worse) stay and perform poorly.

A significant percentage of owner - founder enterprises fail to become large organizations. In many instances, their longevity is limited to one or two generations past the founder.

In the venture capital – funded companies, founders are frequently replaced by more experienced managers from larger companies sooner rather than later. Given all this, a small company ’ s leadership passages are limited by both size and circumstance.

If the business evolves and more people and offices or stores are added, the owner must again go through a leadership passage.

Because she can’t be everywhere at once, she must appoint additional managers and hold them accountable for managerial work.

She must ascertain that the work of the entire enterprise is integrated so that customers are properly served and resources are used efficiently. Essentially, this business owner is going through Passage

Two: from managing others to managing managers.

In this role, she must make sure the total effort is profitable and sustainable.

Setting goals externally based on what customers want and what the competition is doing is another new responsibility.

Small businesses often fail when a new level of leadership-management must be added. We worked closely with a financial service institution that did acquisitions lending to small business, and they asked us to help them determine, before the loan was made, whether the borrowing company could manage a larger company post acquisition. We studied almost fifty loans and found that the companies that failed to handle the increased size were headed by people who were reluctant to change their own work habits; they found it difficult to give up their hands-on involvement or trust a new layer of management. In other words, they were unable or unwilling to make a crucial leadership passage.

As a business continues to grow, understanding the passages in this expanding organization is crucial.

 Knowledge about each passage helps reveal “hidden” leadership problems at every organizational layer; this knowledge also provides a way to solve these problems. Too often, organizations don’t realize that their leaders aren ’ t performing at full capacity because they aren’ t holding them accountable for the right things.

Companies focus only on the economic requirements of a given job rather than the skills, time applications, and values of a specific leadership level. As a result, a business manager is allowed to spend most of his time acquiring new customers rather than developing an effective business strategy. Or the business manager ’ s boss, the group manager, never questions or explores what the business manager values about his work and whether those values are appropriate for the leadership the company requires from him. But when this manager ’ s strategy is flawed and important goals aren’t achieved, he isn’t held accountable (or he isn’t held accountable for the right thing).

If, however, the organization was acutely aware of these leadership passages, the problem could be quickly diagnosed and the manager developed accordingly. The organization would be aware that this business manager is still doing his job as though he’s at Passage One, that he values face-to-face selling above all else, and that he has never acquired basic strategic skills crucial to his current leadership level.

A development program could be created targeting these deficiencies.

Concurrently, this business manager ’ s boss, the group manager, would be held accountable for developing the business manager and coaching him about the importance of strategic planning and how he should be allocating his time.

By establishing appropriate requirements for the six leadership levels, companies could greatly facilitate the succession planning, development, and selection processes in their organizations.

Individual managers could clearly see the gap between their current level of performance and the desired level; they could also see gaps in their training and experience and where they may have skipped a passage (or parts of a passage) and how that ’ s hurting their performance.

The clarity of leadership requirements would also help the human resources function, in that HR could make development decisions based on where people fall short in skills, time applications, and values rather than relying on generalized training and development programs.

In addition, an individual’s readiness for a move to the next leadership level could be clearly identified rather than inaccurately tied to how well they performed in their previous position. These leadership passages provide companies with a way to “ objectify ” selection. Rather than selecting based on past performance, personal connections, and personal preferences, managers can be held to a higher, more effective standard.

Organizations can select someone to make a leadership turn when he’s clearly working at the level to which he is assigned and demonstrating some of the skills required at the next level. And of course, the Pipeline model provides organizations with a diagnostic tool that helps them identify mismatches between individual capabilities and leadership level and remove the mismatched person if necessary.

You should also be aware of three other benefits to the pipeline.

First, having a leadership pipeline in place can reduce emotional stress for individual employees. When someone skips leadership passages and is placed in a position for which he lacks the skills, time applications, and work values, it takes a large emotional toll.

The Pipeline model makes skipping passages unlikely.

Second, this model helps people move through leadership passages at the right speed. People who ticket-punch their way through jobs don’t absorb the necessary values and skills; people who get stuck in a passage never “go” places where they can acquire new skills and evolve their leadership capacity. The Pipeline model provides a measurement system identifying when someone is ready to move to the next leadership level.

Third, the Pipeline model reduces the typical time frame needed to prepare an individual for the top leadership position in a large corporation. Because the Pipeline model clearly defines what is needed to move from one level to the next, there ’ s little or no wasted time on jobs that merely duplicate skills.

From a pure talent perspective, however, the most significant benefit of the Pipeline methodology is that you don’t need to bring in stars to prime the leadership pump and unclog the pipeline. You can create your own stars up and down the line, beginning at the first level when people make the transition from managing themselves to managing others.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q. Does this model cover everyone in the company?

A. In the companies we have worked with, this model covers about 80 to 85 percent of the positions. Many positions in the corporate staff—typically high - level specialists such as strategy analysts, tax lawyers, benefits designers, insurance specialists, and treasury experts — may not fit within the Pipeline framework, because the Pipeline was originally created for operational people who move up to run businesses and the company. It is possible to amend the Pipeline model to indicate where key staff positions fit.

Q. If I am a corporate specialist who wants to move into operational leadership, how do I get into the flow of the pipeline to be considered for leadership positions in the future?

A. Corporate specialists usually have company- wide or close to company-wide accountability for a narrow (relative to the whole company) subject area. If they don’t have a deep understanding of the workings of the business or businesses, they need to acquire it. They also must acquire experience in leading large numbers of people with diverse skills and backgrounds. Because you want to move into operational leadership, it is best to move early in your career out of a corporate specialty and into a position leading to management. You should also prepare to take a pay cut if necessary. This learning may require swallowing one's pride, but it is critical to success in moving from a corporate specialty into operational leadership.

Q. Can I use this if my company or business doesn’t fit the model?

A. Few companies will fit the Leadership Pipeline model perfectly. We don’t suggest that you fit your company or business or function into the model. Rather, adapt the model to your company while keeping the principles intact. For example, many marketing functions and HR functions don’t have all the passages; the marketing function manager may have to deliver both function manager and manager of managers results.

Don’ t create a new passage to fit the model. Instead, create a passage when size, scope, and good organization design requires it.

Q. What are the biggest problems in producing a pipeline of leaders that is full and flowing?

A. The following are the three biggest problems that we have observed:

1. Companies fail to recognize when inappropriate work values cause leaders to do work themselves that others should be doing. They may be able to do it faster and better than direct reports, but they aren ’ t growing themselves or their people.

2. Senior management doesn’t require that all leaders develop other leaders. Yet this is in everyone’s best interest, because in the end it frees up valuable time.

3. Senior leaders spend all their time on today’ s rather than tomorrow’s issues. As a result of this focus on the present, the company is not prepared to cope with future developments.

Q. What should I do if I missed a passage?

A. Many successful leaders working in finance or HR missed passages because their organizations are small and don’t have all the passages.

Examine your work habits to see whether you are working at the right level. If not, pay special attention to whichever chapter discusses your missing passage. Examine your mistakes and misses. If they are caused by lack of skill from a previous layer, ask for help from your boss or HR to fill the gap.

Q. How does this model account for our company’s competency model?

A. Competency models seem to be everywhere, so we have to account for them. Unfortunately, most competency models are not differentiated by layer or are differentiated inappropriately. They suffer from a “one size fits all ” construction. We suggest you align them by layer where possible by connecting them to the work of that layer. That will improve the value of your competency models. If your competencies are not or cannot be connected to specific work, call them what they are—values. We observe line managers ignoring them in most companies because they don’t have a clear connection to the work.

Observations from the Field

• The size of the Leadership Pipeline depends on the size of the company. All companies have a “basket” of leadership work to do.

Big companies have a big basket; small companies have a small one. As we’ve worked with organizations of all sizes, we’ve learned that there are more “break points” between old and new jobs in larger companies, so the Pipeline expands to fit the size of the organization.

• Pipeline principles translate across geographical boundaries. The Leadership Pipeline model has helped both fast - paced, highly successful companies in developed countries as well as companies in developing countries, including formerly communist countries.

These passages are universal, as are the requirements for each passage.

• The number of passages varies by company. Some companies have six passages, some seven, some four.

The concept doesn't  change. We’ve found that because we listed six passages, people became fixated on six as the right number for every organization. It ’ s not. What is required is proper differentiation, with even spacing between the layers.

• Companies often have too many leadership positions and too little leadership in all functions. We have found that one of the great benefits of the Pipeline model is spotlighting the “ too many leaders ” syndrome.

It identifies how companies reward individual contributors with promotions to leadership roles.

Strong technical people are given a title, two people to manage, and more money. They still spend most of their time doing technical work.

• Defining a technical pipeline is a great idea. Given the previous points, we discovered that strong technical people need to have their own passages, with concomitant rewards. It doesn’t take much work to define the technical pipeline.

It is actually an old concept that isn ’ t used much these days. It offers an alternative for those who want more challenging work or more rewards but can ’ t or won ’ t lead. It really helps in unclogging the pipeline.

• A greater emphasis should be placed on the future at the functional layer and above. As we alluded to earlier, working on the future is hard but must be done to assure long - term success. Getting trapped into solving today ’ s problems uses up leaders ’ time. Leaders at the functional layer and above should get their people to solve those problems and free themselves to grapple with challenges down the road.