HR-Glossar
Führungskräfteentwicklung (leadership development)
How leadership capability is built systematically, why seminars alone achieve little and what the first transition into leadership decides.
1. What is Führungskräfteentwicklung (leadership development)?
Leadership development is the systematic build-up of leadership capability – from preparation for a first leadership role, through ongoing support, to developing leaders who lead other leaders.
It differs from general people development in its subject: leadership is not a technical skill that could be acquired in a seminar but an activity learnt in the doing. That shapes what works and what does not.
The most critical point is the first transition – from a specialist role into leadership. There the measure of success changes entirely: what counts is no longer one's own output but the effect achieved through others. Anyone left without support in that phase falls back on what they know – the specialist work – and becomes the bottleneck of their own team.
2. Origin and development
For a long time leadership was regarded as something conferred by promotion. Whoever excelled technically became a manager – a selection logic that confuses two different capabilities and entrusts the best specialist with a task their strength does not qualify them for.
Leadership development grew out of that experience as a field of its own. Its first answer was the seminar – and the recognition that it achieves little on its own is just as old. What is practised in training is rarely available in daily work when the surroundings demand something else.
From that a shift has followed: away from the single training event, towards a combination of experience in the role, support from peers or a coach, and a smaller share of formal learning. The exact proportions are disputed and cannot seriously be quantified; the direction is not.
The second finding is more uncomfortable: leadership behaviour follows what the organisation rewards. Train collaboration but promote individual output, and you get individual output. Development that does not take the incentive structure into account evaporates.
3. Core principles and how it works
Leadership is learnt in the doing
The role itself is the most important place of learning. Training prepares and reflects but does not replace the experience.
The first transition is the most critical
From specialist work into leadership the measure of success changes entirely. Without support the old specialist role continues – with the manager as the bottleneck.
Technical excellence does not qualify anyone for leadership
The two capabilities barely correlate. Selecting on technical output selects on the wrong criterion – and loses the best specialist at the same time.
Incentives beat training
Leadership behaviour follows what is rewarded and promoted. Development without a look at the incentive structure has no effect.
Support works harder than single events
Peer consultation, coaching and regular reflection start where the difficulties actually arise.
A way back belongs in the design
Where leadership does not fit, a return to the specialist track should be possible without counting as failure. Without that route, wrong appointments persist.
4. Who is Führungskräfteentwicklung (leadership development) relevant for?
- New managers – for them the first transition is the decisive phase. - Experienced managers – they frequently lead with no feedback on their own leadership. - People development – they design selection, programmes and support. - Management – they set the incentives that leadership behaviour orients itself to. - Specialists facing the career step – for them the question is whether leadership is the right route at all.
5. How it differs from related terms
- Leadership development and people development – people development covers all employees; leadership development is the part with a subject of its own. - Leadership development and talent management – talent management identifies and retains people with potential; development builds capability. The two interlock. - A leadership track and a specialist track – a specialist track with equivalent pay and recognition is the most effective measure against wrong appointments into leadership roles. - Training and coaching – training conveys methods to a group, coaching works on one person's situation. - Leadership development and appraisal – appraisal assesses, development equips. Combining them in one format obstructs openness.
6. Variants and adaptations
Common building blocks, ordered by effect:
- Support in the first year – a mentor or coach, regular reflection. The most effective block, because it starts at the transition. - Peer consultation – managers work on their own cases in a fixed group. Low effort and close to practice. - Feedback from several directions – assessments from the team, peers and superiors. Effective where confidential and with no link to pay. - Modular programmes – spread over months, with practical tasks between modules. - Single seminars – least effective on their own; sensible as a supplement. - A specialist track as an alternative – not a development measure in the narrow sense, but the most effective correction of the selection logic.
7. Advantages and challenges
Advantages
- Leadership can be learnt – the build-up is plannable and not left to chance
- Support at the first transition prevents the most expensive wrong turns
- Good leadership has an immediate effect on retention, absence and capability
- Peer formats are low-effort and close to practice
- A specialist track relieves the leadership track of people who do not want to be on it
Challenges
- Single seminars achieve little on their own – the transfer into daily work is missing
- Development against the incentive structure evaporates
- The effect is hard to measure, which makes it harder to justify
- The time competes with day-to-day work and regularly loses
- Feedback from the team is delicate where confidentiality is not assured
- Wrong appointments persist where there is no way back to the specialist track
8. Best practices for implementation
Start at the first transition
The first year in a leadership role decides patterns that last a long time. Supporting people here achieves more than any later programme.
Separate selection from technical output
The best specialist is not automatically the best manager – and promoting them costs both. An equivalent specialist track is the most effective counter-measure.
Check the incentives before training
What gets promoted shapes leadership behaviour more than any seminar. Wanting collaboration while rewarding individual output produces individual output.
Keep feedback confidential and unlinked to pay
As soon as an assessment affects pay, what gets said changes. Developmental feedback belongs apart from appraisal.
Provide a way back
Where leadership does not fit, a return to the specialist track must be possible without counting as failure. Otherwise wrong appointments persist – to everyone's cost.
9. Tips for employers and employees
For employers
- **The first transition is decisive** – support people there rather than retraining them later
- **Technical output is not a selection criterion for leadership** – the capabilities barely correlate
- **Check incentives before training** – behaviour follows what gets promoted
- **Offer a specialist track** – the most effective correction of the selection logic
For employees
- **Leadership is a different activity** – not the next rung of the same one
- **Ask for support** – in the first year it is worth most
- **Check whether you want it** – more pay is a poor reason to change role
- **Ask about the specialist track** – it often exists and is little known
10. Conclusion
Leadership is learnt in the doing, not in a seminar. That is why the most important building block of leadership development works where the transition happens: in the first year of a leadership role. There the measure of success changes entirely – what counts is no longer one's own output but the effect achieved through others. Anyone left without support continues the specialist role and becomes the bottleneck of their own team.
An uncomfortable insight stands at the start of the chain: technical excellence does not qualify anyone for leadership. The two capabilities barely correlate, and selecting on technical output loses the best specialist at the same time. The most effective counter-measure is not a development measure at all but an equivalent specialist track – including the possibility of returning to it from a leadership role without that counting as failure.
And a reservation about any programme: leadership behaviour follows what the organisation rewards. Train collaboration but promote individual output, and you get individual output – however good the training was. For a group running a leadership programme centrally, that is the part that cannot be shipped with the curriculum.
Sources
- German Association for Human Resource Management – leadership development (opens in a new tab)
- Fraunhofer Institute for Industrial Engineering – leadership and organisation (English pages) (opens in a new tab)
- Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training – continuing training (English pages) (opens in a new tab)
- Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health – leadership and health (English pages) (opens in a new tab)
Related terms
Our promise
Software supports. People take responsibility.
Let us talk about your payroll – no strings attached, specific, and with a dedicated contact from day one.