Learning and Development online support
CHAPTER 17
Developing leaders and managers
THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER
The purpose of this six-part chapter is to explore how an organisation’s leadership and
management development (LMD) processes can help to build its future capability as well as
aiding the achievement of excellent performance in a current situation (SLIDES 1 and 2).
THE LEADERSHIP PIPELINE
WHO ARE THE LEADERS AND THE MANAGERS?
The two Reflections reproduced below can be used to stimulate general class discussion or as
the basis for group work and presentations in plenary session.
Reflection
To what extent does corporate leadership in your own organisation seem to
successfully tackle the tasks discussed in this section? Where do you see the greatest
barriers and aids to effective corporate leadership to lie?
Feedback comments
The key tasks of corporate leadership are shown on SLIDE 3. Major barriers to the effective
performance of these tasks include:



a dominant logic that works against unlearning, double-loop learning, creativity and
innovation (see Chapter 5)
a poor-quality strategy process (see Chapter 12)
lack of appropriate performance management and development of both employed and
voluntary members of the corporate team.
Reflection
Reflecting on any group of front-line or operational leaders in your organisation,
what seem to be their leadership tasks, and what help do they receive in developing
the knowledge, skills and behaviours needed to perform them?
Feedback comments
The key leadership tasks of operational and front-line leaders are shown on SLIDES 4 and 5.
Recalling material in Chapter 6, it is helpful to note that front-line managers are defined by
Purcell and Hutchinson (2007) as those who are are accountable to a higher level of
management for the performance of a work group of approximately 10 to 25 people. The task
of FLMs is to help to create, or transmit, impressions of the organisation as a whole
(commitment) and to make jobs satisfying by influencing how demanding the job is, how much
autonomy the employee has in the job and the sense of achievement that comes from doing the
job. They therefore largely determine how effectively the AMO model operates in the
particular situation (see SLIDE 5).
Operational and first-line leaders need particular support from HR policies and practices,
training and development in people management skills, and reward systems that recognise
effective performance of their leadership role.
HOW EFFECTIVE IS LMD?
KEY FAILINGS IN LMD
The key failings identified in research are summarised on SLIDE 6. Two other issues of
longstanding concern noted in this subsection of the chapter are:


Development programmes are often politicised by being used to reinforce instead of
challenge the leadership and management status quo.
Both in the UK and across the world complacency regarding the competence of
organisations’ managers remains a major barrier to improving the poor performance of
many.
ASSESSING THE EVIDENCE
RESEARCH PROBLEMS
SLIDE 7 summarises main issues raised in this part of the section.
KEY FINDINGS
Reflection
At this point you may find it helpful to re-read the Procon UK case study in Chapter
8 to see how that company approached the planning and design of its major
programme for front-line managers. You should pay particular attention to the three
factors just discussed above.
Feedback comments
The three factors mentioned in this Reflection are those that, according to an international
consortium’s research findings over a seven-year period, account for 25 per cent of variance in
organisational performance (Mabey and Terry, 2007). I relate them here to the way in which
top management at Procon Manufacturing UK’s Birmingham site (the focus in Chapter 8)
approached the planning and design of its front-line managers’ development programme:

a strategic approach to HRM, ensuring its integration with business strategy
At the Birmingham site not all HR practices were well integrated with business strategy
and this prevented the fully effective transfer of the FLM programme’s outcomes to the
workplace. The FLMs were particularly dissatisfied with the inconsistent way in which
recognition and reward policies were implemented across Procon’s workplaces, and in their
informal evaluation of the FLM programme (at the end of the case study) senior managers
singled out the firm’s performance management system as being particularly in need of
overhaul.


a thoughtful, long-term approach to developing managerial capability
At the Birmingham site this approach was evident in the emphasis placed by the chief
executive and his top management team on a long-haul approach to the development of
FLMs, which they saw as a four-stage journey that would take some years to complete.
However, the approach to middle management’s development seemed to have been given
less detailed consideration. As a result leadership and management development overall
lacked full consistency and integration.
a belief by line managers that their employer is taking management development seriously
At the Birmingham site there were many indicators to show that middle and front-line
managers believed that the firm took management development seriously. The emphasis in
the workplace, in the performance management system and in training and development
programmes on the Five Key Values was intended to ensure a clear understanding of the
difference between a high-performing company and one that fell below acceptable
standards. Again, though, the failure to ensure that all middle managers were actively
committed to the FLM programme and to facilitating the transfer of participants’ learning
to the workplace meant that the intentions of top management in relation to management
development were to some extent frustrated.
PUTTING FINDINGS INTO PRACTICE
THE STARTING POINT
SLIDE 8 repeats the questions that research suggests should form the starting point for
planning a leadership and management development strategy, and that underpin Figure 19 in
the text (SLIDE 9).
WHAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT?
ORGANISATIONALLY-BASED LMD
Lippitt (1983) emphasised the need to reinforce new attitudes through ‘meaningful renewal
systems’. It is important to consider just what that quotation means, and in so doing, to return to
points made earlier in the chapter.
Dogmatic attitudes in leaders and managers will make them unable to function effectively in a
changing world because of their refusal to acknowledge that they themselves need to change.
LMD that does not focus on attitudes can, unwittingly, simply ensure the perpetuation of old
mindsets to the detriment of new learning. Therefore when designing development strategies
and programmes it is essential to consider the kind of workplace that will be conducive to the
acquisition, retention and full utilisation over the longer term of values and attitudes that
participants acquire. How many graduate trainees, for example, quickly leave the organisation
they have joined because, despite promises of fast-track advancement and the stimulus of an
innovative development programme, the reality of life in that organisation increasingly
contradicts the expectations that the programme has encouraged them to hold? How many
middle and front-line managers in the leadership pipeline, eager to put into practice new ideas
and new ways of managing and behaving, are unable to do so because there is no support for
such changes among their leaders?
Hence the need for a genuine commitment by corporate leaders and throughout the organisation
to accept the changed values and attitudes, as well as the new competencies, that can result
from a powerful LMD programme. If the ‘renewal’ it offers is resisted by those who hold the
most powerful positions in the organisation, it can only indicate that the true agenda for the
programme is a political one and that the process is not intended to produce fundamental
changes in the status quo.
This, in turn, raises other issues. For example: in order to ensure that the organisation has an
adequate supply of leaders whose attitudes and values are future-oriented, who are adaptive to
change and who are receptive to new ideas, what balance should there be between investing in
internal management and leadership development and buying in from outside? And at what
point and organisational level should any buying in start?
Competency frameworks that inform LMD programmes
It may be helpful to amplify the discussion in the section concerning these frameworks. As an
informative CIPD factsheet points out (CIPD, 2008), although in the 1980s and 1990s HR
professionals drew a distinction between ‘competencies’ and ‘competences’, now the two terms
are often used interchangeably. It provides the following distinction between the two terms:
‘Competency’ is more precisely defined as the behaviours that employees must have, or
must acquire, to input into a situation in order to achieve high levels of performance .
‘Competence’ relates to a system of minimum standards or is demonstrated by
performance and outputs.
Basically, in the context of LMD there are two kinds of competency framework:
National competency frameworks
These have been popularised in the UK through the work of the Management Charter Initiative
(MCI) mentioned in this part of the chapter. The MCI was established in the late 1980s with the
aim of improving the performance of UK organisations by increasing the standard and
accessibility of management education and development. Supported by the Confederation of
British Industry, the British Institute of Management, the Foundation of Management
Education and the Department for Education and Employment, it led to the establishment in
1997 of national professional management qualifications at three levels – certificate, diploma
and degree/master’s level – existing qualification courses such as the Diploma of Management
Studies and MBA being integrated into a national, hierarchical structure.
The MCI competency framework is derived from functional analysis. The national standards
relating to this framework are expressed as a ladder of qualifications to complement the
continuous development of managers in the workplace. They are popular with many
organisations as aids to staff recruitment and appraisal as well as training and development, and
in encouraging and enabling first-level management trainees to get their learning nationally
accredited (as was the case in the first-line managers’ programme described in Chapter 8).
The MCI competency-based framework’s aim is to improve the capability of managers by
applying standardised criteria to the description of their roles and tasks and appraising their
performance against clearly defined, measurable behavioural and task targets. The approach fits
best the declining number of organisations structured on relatively stable, hierarchical lines
with a range of positions through which managers can systematically develop and progress
along specified career pathways. Programmes can be run at different management levels and
career stages, and can develop both core and role-specific competences.
However, the MCI framework is also applied in some much less relevant contexts, both in
public and private sectors, such as newly decentralised units where middle managers face
radically changed roles and tasks. Here, attempts are often made to give the framework a
future-oriented thrust by including a development centre component from which every
participant leaves with a tailored development programme specifying present competency
levels and appropriate developmental priorities together with an agreed L&D plan to achieve
them.
Customised organisational frameworks
To quote from the CIPD’s (2008) factsheet:
Many organisations develop their competency frameworks through an internal research
programme, sometimes aided by advisers from an external consultancy. Methods of
developing a framework range from importing a n existing off-the-shelf package
through to developing the entire thing from scratch. The best solution usually lies
between these two extremes, namely internally generating a framework that builds in
business relevance, but do this by adapting existing mo dels that have already been
widely used and have proved successful.
Various surveys show that competency frameworks are now widely used in the UK (CIPD,
2008). The CIPD factsheet mounts a spirited defence of their benefits, attributing most of their
alleged weaknesses to poor design or unskilled use. Concerns, however, remain although most
– but not all – are directed at functionally-derived frameworks, especially those tied to national
standards. Key points are made in the text, but I will expand on three here:

The hectic and fragmented nature of managerial and leadership work
Partridge’s (1989) point about this was cited earlier in the chapter and it is a crucial one.
Even first-line managers use a range of skills that cannot easily be categorised. Many of
those skills are, and must be, integrated in their practice, and this tends to a synergetic
effect – that is to say, one where the outcome of management action is greater than the sum
of its parts. Such skills have been styled as ‘overarching competences’ (Burgoyne, 1989)
and are to do with achieving synthesis, balance and perspective. There is a clear danger that
reliance on functional frameworks when planning the development of strategic managers
will mean that ‘the integrated work of managing still gets lost in the process of describing
it’ (Mintzberg, 1994a: 11).
Of course managers at whatever organisational level do need to develop functional
competencies. But what is at issue is how far higher-level capacities – needed by those
moving into as well as those within the leadership pipeline – to do with judgement,
intuition, mental elasticity, abstract thinking and tolerance of risk and ambiguity can be
viewed in the same light as more measurable ‘competencies’ (Mintzberg, 1994a and
1994b).


Problems of scale and change
A decade ago a report by Guile and Fonda (1998) identified as many as 20 capabilities that
managers even then needed to operate in roles and jobs that, for many, will have continued
to change dramatically. Can functionally-based competency frameworks adequately cope
with such a variety of ‘capabilities’ and with such a rapid pace of change? And what is the
cost, in time, money and expertise, in regularly updating them in order that they can
attempt to do so?
Problems of strategy and dominant logics
A distinguishing feature of many competency frameworks is their aim of formalising and
linking both individual and organisational competencies to strategic priorities and to human
resource systems (Alvarez, 1996). Organisational competencies are those unique and core
capabilities that enable an organisation to innovate and gain competitive advantage. A
fundamental concern here is that a competency framework can simply reinforce any given
strategy, regardless of its quality. This can lead to a dangerous narrowing of managerial
perspectives, inhibiting the intellectual independence needed to question given strategy in
the light of an ever-changing environment (ibid). Certainly, a competency framework is
likely to develop from, and become part of, the dominant logic of an organisation, defined
as ‘the way in which managers conceptualise the business and make critical allocation
decisions’ (Prahalad and Bettis, 1986: 490).
This is a reminder that management is not a fully objective and consistently ‘rational’
activity but a process that involves constantly calculating how to make a way through
‘contradictory demands in a world of uncertainty’ (Edwards, 1990). Political skills, courage
and creative ability are crucial in enabling managers to cut through such complexities, and
many competency frameworks may by their nature be poorly equipped to aid them in those
endeavours.
Here is an exercise to build on learning about organisationally-based LMD. Its aim is not to test
students’ programme design skills as such, but to focus their attention on evaluation of
programme outcomes and on learning methods related to those outcomes. They may find it
useful to review relevant content in Chapters 7 and 8 as a preparation for the exercise.
Group work:
EVALUATING A LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME AND ITS
LEARNING METHODS
Purpose:
To encourage a critical approach to the design and evaluation of leadership development
programmes.
Case: Hays’ leadership development programme
Hays is a global recruitment firm, and until 2007 it had never had any structured
development for its 300-strong leadership group. By then, however, the company’s plans
for growth made it essential to achieve ‘strategic agility, cross-company collaboration
and change management skills’. The plc board therefore decided to make a significant
investment in a programme to develop all its leaders.
It was decided to start with the 80 most senior people in the organisation, in order to gain
the commitment of those at other organisational levels. Their one-year programme began
in October 2007, with the cohort split into groups consisting of eight people from
different global locations to encourage understanding of each other’s challenges and
promote networking. A year later the programme was rolled out to the rest of the
company’s leaders.
Core components of the 2007–8 programme were two psychometric tests, a 360-degree
feedback exercise using the consultancy’s own leadership competency model and
personal discussion on its outcomes with a business psychologist, the subsequent
development of an action plan to build on the individual’s strengths and address any
risks, and further development of the plan as a result of an intense six-hour business
simulation and a full and frank feedback discussion.
The board has already perceived a positive change in the top team’s behaviour and
culture. The most common feedback received from the 80 participants who entered the
programme in 2007 was that they felt for the first time part of a global organisation.
Following the end of the programme they were to do a further 360-degree exercise and
their team performance over the previous year would be assessed.
Source: J. Simms (2008) People Management Guide to Assessment, October: 22–7. With the permission of
the publisher
Task:
After studying the account above, you have three tasks:
1 Identify and justify any further information you would seek in order to able to assess
the effectiveness of the programme for the 80 senior executives that the case
describes.
2 On the basis of the information provided in the case and your own knowledge of
leadership development methods, explain and justify how far you would support,
change or add to the methods used in the 2007–8 programme.
3 Prepare a presentation of your views and recommendations, for discussion in plenary
session.
Feedback comments
Groups should take an evidence-based approach to the first two tasks, grounded in sound
findings from research and practice and in relevant theory and frameworks.
Task 1: Identify and justify any further information you would seek in order to assess the
effectiveness of the programme for the 80 senior executives that the case describes.
Key questions to ask here include (SLIDE 10):






It is stated in the case that the outcomes set for the programme were to increase ‘strategic
agility, cross-company collaboration and change management skills’. What specific
outcomes for the business were these increased skills intended to achieve, and what
measures were used to operationalise and evaluate those outcomes?
Who decided on the measures and their implementation?
Outcomes to do with changing the culture and behaviours of top management are also
mentioned in the case. What were the specific outcomes set here, how were they measured,
and by whom?
At what points in time was measurement of outcomes carried out (ie before, during,
immediately after, and again in the longer term)?
What systems, processes and procedures are there in the workplace to ensure that
participants’ action plans are carried through and are regularly updated? For any
programme to achieve its full potential there must be supporting HR policies and practices,
so it is important to know whether (for example) there are relevant policies for rewards and
recognition and talent management in the company.
Research confirms that work-based learning is becoming increasingly popular as a way of
developing high-potential managers into future leaders, especially in international LMD.
What will the company be doing to identify and develop those with the potential to enter
the leadership pipeline in future?
Task 2: On the basis of the information provided in the case and your own knowledge of
leadership development methods, explain and justify how far you would support, change or add
to the methods used in the 2007–8 programme (SLIDE 11).
It is clear from the information in the case that the design and methods used in the programme
are based on a strategy of experiential learning favoured by many leadership development
experts. Consistent with that, the programme is both organisationally-based and has a strategic
focus. However, new leadership tasks and methods need to be supported or initiated by changes
in business processes. Unlearning and relearning likewise need support from organisational
systems if they are to take root.
It is particularly important when relying on the work-based learning route to leadership and
management development to incorporate methods that encourage lateral thinking and doubleloop learning. Without those correctives work-based learning can result in narrow mindsets and
skilled incompetence. It would therefore be essential to discover how far such methods have
been used in the 2007–8 programme and will be used in subsequent programmes.
Methods of work-based learning in common use on such programmes but not mentioned in the
case include project work, action learning, coaching, mentoring and developmental job
rotations. It would be important to know whether any of these were also incorporated into the
programme, and what specific criteria determined the use of the methods that were included.
With regard to the consultancy’s competency framework, leadership competencies should be
diagnosed from their results and their organisational impact. On what basis was the framework
produced, and what evidence is there regarding the impact of the competencies it features?
A favoured method in this kind of programme is to use a blended approach that provides handson learning through international assignments. The assignments have a unique value when they
produce greater diversity in multinational organisations, especially in the top team which often
reflects only the nationality of the parent company. It would therefore be important to find out
if there was an assignment component in the 2007–8 programme, and if any is intended for the
programme being rolled out from October 2008 to the rest of the leadership group.
QUALIFICATION-LED LMD
To say a little more about educational programmes, when well-chosen they offer particular
value for four types of individual or groups (SLIDE 12):

potential managers who have yet to decide where they want to specialise and what kind of
managerial role will best suit their disposition as well as their abilities – particularly
inexperienced young entrants to the organisation

managers involved in structural and role change in their organisation – they need help in
developing new abilities, understanding and social skills to perform effectively in that new
situation

managers who are set in their ways – they are so focused on their customary ways of
thinking, behaving and performing that they are probably blocking the development both of
themselves and of their teams. Such managers need the challenges that powerful
educational programmes can provide if the barriers they are unwittingly creating are to be
demolished

managers who are being prepared for more strategic roles in their organisations – they
need an interplay of on-the-job development and demanding intellectual activity in
order to help them in that transition.
The Reflection reproduced here could be used to stimulate class discussion.
Reflection
Imagine that a manager who has been converted by the works of Alan Mumford says
to you forcefully:
Management development? No two ways about it – learning from the job, in
the workplace is the only real way. Give us a good job pathway and plenty of
role models and mentoring – and you’ll find our development takes care of
itself.
What reply do you think you should give, and why?
Feedback comments
It will be clear from the feedback for the Hays’ leadership programme case that development
does not ‘take care of itself’ – indeed, all of that feedback could apply equally well to this
Reflection. In sum, and as a wide body of research from the 1970s to today makes clear
(SLIDE 13):






Organisationally-based development must have a clear strategic focus.
New tasks and methods in which leaders and managers are being developed need the
support of changes in business and HR processes and practices if they are to be put to
effective use.
In-house or external educational programmes have much to offer to the development of
managers and leaders when carefully chosen and tailored to needs. They can broaden their
vision, challenge their customary ways of thinking and behaving and expand their
intellectual capacity. They offer a safe environment in which individuals can identify and
reflect on their personal weaknesses and strengths and explore problematic scenarios in a
variety of organisational settings.
If the new attitudes, knowledge and skills that organisationally-based development is
intended to achieve are to take root, there must be a culture which ensures that unlearning
can occur and that new learning can be effectively applied in the workplace.
There must be effective monitoring and evaluation of the impact of development strategy,
with data used to inform future development and business decision-making.
Middle-level and first-line leaders and managers must themselves have leaders who are
effective role models for the behaviours and performance that the organisation needs, and
must be managed, supported and recognised in ways that ensure their commitment to the
organisation’s goals and values.
TASKS FOR HR/L&D PROFESSIONALS
Reflection
Reflecting on the material covered in this chapter and taking any relevant experience
of your own also into account, what do you consider should be the main features of
your organisation’s approach to developing its leaders and managers? And are there
any improvements that you could suggest to the operation of its leadership pipeline?
Feedback comments
There are many ways of responding to this Reflection, whether it is used to stimulate general
class discussion or group work leading to plenary presentations. One approach would be to
consider how far each student’s organisation follows the ‘Principles to guide LMD’ shown in
Figure 19. Another would be to reflect on organisational practice by reference to the ‘seven
areas of impact’ suggested in this section (SLIDE 14).
CHAPTER REVIEW QUESTIONS
Review Question 1
Most long-serving voluntary non-executive directors on a housing association’s board
object to the Chair’s proposal that each should have an annual appraisal and a personal
development plan like their salaried colleagues. What arguments would you put forward
to persuade them to change their minds?
Feedback comments
This question appeared in a past CIPD exam for L&D Generalist candidates who had an hour in
which to answer seven out of ten questions in the relevant section of the paper. Here is an
example of an answer that gained a good mark because although it never explicitly focused on
the voluntary nature of the non-executives’ role and it was rather poorly expressed in parts, it
made valid points and introduced persuasive practical ideas.
Performance appraisal should play a part in the strategy of all organisations. It is
important that the corporate goals, mission and vision is shared with all employees, but
they should see how they fit and how their contribution will help an organisation achieve
its goals.
As an executive team it sends out a strong and important message to employees if all
staff have appraisals – it indicates that it is important for everyone. It is an opportunity
to:





discuss the overall direction of the organisation
explain what part they see themselves playing
address any problems they are experiencing in their role that may be overcome by
organisational adjustments
open up dialogue
if there is a culture of blame, start to change this culture.
If the non-executive directors can see the part they can play in the organisation’s longterm and strategic plans – it may be as a result of developing a personal development
plan – they can identify their learning needs and also skills that can be utilised in the
organisation – for example, to mentor staff.
All of this sends clear messages to not only staff employed but potential new recruits.
Review Question 2
A colleague comments to you that ‘What this organisation lacks is skilled leadership.’
Justify key questions you will ask in order to get a better idea of the fundamental problem
that concerns him.
Feedback comments
There are at least two ways of answering this question, the first by focusing primarily on
meanings and evidence base, the second by focusing primarily on analysis of training and
learning needs. Either would be acceptable, as would some appropriate combination of the two.
Taking the first approach, key questions to ask would be those to clarify what the questioner
means by ‘leadership’ and to test the evidence he can provide for his allegation. They would
therefore include:






To whom is the questioner referring? Does he mean unskilled leadership, management, or
both? Many fail to make a distinction between leaders as those responsible for inspiring
and guiding the present and future direction of the business and for providing key features
of organisational context, and managers as those who are accountable for policy
implementation, order, efficiency and the achievement of business targets.
To what organisational level of leadership is he referring? Corporate (ie board and top
executives), middle management or front-line team leadership, or all? Each level has
different although interrelated responsibilities.
Is he referring to specific individuals occupying leadership roles in the organisation, or to
entire leadership groups? Organisations like Tesco view leadership as a collective rather
than an individual responsibility and reflect this in their policies for leadership and
management selection and development.
How does he know there is a problem with leadership? What kind of data is he relying on?
Are his arguments inspired by hunch or rumour, or do they rest on a sound evidence base?
What kind of impact is the alleged lack of leadership skill having on the organisation?
(This is another question to test whether his allegation has a persuasive evidence base.)
What kind of actions does he think would achieve his desired change in leadership, and
why? (This is yet another question to test his evidence base.)
The second type of answer would also stress the need to first determine meanings and evidence
base, but its detailed content thereafter would concern seeking information about the nature of
training and learning needs, in order to determine the purpose and design of a learning strategy
or event to improve leadership skills. It would therefore involve questions to do with:




Establishing needs: What kind of problematic outcomes for the organisation and for
individuals are being caused by the alleged unskilled leadership, and where and why do
skills most need to be changed if these are to be resolved? Are the outcomes ones that L&D
can best resolve, or should they be tackled in some other way? If L&D is the major issue,
what seem to be the main types of training and learning need here – leadership skills,
knowledge, attitudes, behaviour? What does the evidence suggest – and where and how
sound is that evidence?
Analysis for job-related problems: What kind of analysis would be most appropriate in
order to decide if it is the purpose, structure or components of leadership roles that is the
fundamental problem: comprehensive, key task, problem-centred or competency-based?
What criteria should determine the approach to take?
Analysis for learning-related problems: What sources of data should be used to establish if
the fundamental problem lies in individuals who are occupying leadership roles and, if that
is indeed the problem, to identify the gaps that exist between desired and actual levels or
types of individual competence, disposition or behaviour.
Design and delivery of learning: Given the nature of the needs that analysis reveals,
together with available resources and organisational context, what would seem to be the
most effective and feasible way of responding to them? And who should carry
responsibility for planning, design, delivery and evaluation of learning?
REFERENCES
(including those cited on the slides)
ALVAREZ, J. L. (1996) ‘Are we asking too much of managers?’, Financial Times, 12 July: 13.
BEARD, C. and IRVINE, D. (2005) ‘Management training and development: problems,
paradoxes and perspectives’, in J. P. Wilson (ed.) Human Resource Development: Learning and
training for individuals and organizations, 2nd edition. London: Kogan Page, pp380–403.
BURGOYNE, J. (1989) Management Development: Context and strategies. Aldershot: Gower.
CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF PERSONNEL AND DEVELOPMENT (2008) Competency and
Competency Frameworks. Factsheet. London: CIPD. Online version also available at
http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/perfmangmt/competnces/comptfrmwk.htm [accessed 16
December 2008].
EDWARDS, P. (1990) ‘Uncertain worlds’, Times Higher Education Supplement, 6 April.
GUILE, D. and FONDA, N. (1998) Performance Management through Capability. London:
Institute of Personnel and Development.
LIPPITT, G. (1983) ‘Management development as the key to organisational renewal’, Journal of
Management Development, Vol.1, No.2: 36–9.
MABEY, C. and TERRY, R. (2007) ‘The manager in the mirror’, People Management, Vol.13,
No.14, 12 July: 38–40.
MINTZBERG, H. (1994a) ‘Rounding out the manager’s job’, Sloan Management Review,
Vol.36, No.1: 11–26.
MINTZBERG, H. (1994b) The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. Hemel Hempstead: PrenticeHall.
PRAHALAD, C. K. and BETTIS, R. A. (1986) ‘The dominant logic: a new linkage between
diversity and performance’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol.7, No.6: 485–501.
PURCELL, J. and HUTCHINSON, S. (2007) ‘Front-line managers as agents in the HRMperformance causal chain: theory, analysis and evidence’, Human Resource Management
Journal, Vol.17, No.1: 3–20.
SIMMS, J. (2008) ‘Don’t let talent go down the tube’, People Management Guide to
Assessment, October: 22–7.
TANSLEY, C., TURNER, P. A., FOSTER, C., HARRIS, L. M., SEMPIK, A., STEWART, J. and
WILLIAMS, H. (2007) Talent: Strategy, Management and Measurement. Research into Practice.
London: CIPD. Summary available online at http://www.cipd.co.uk/ Bookstore/reasearch.htm
[accessed 7 August 2008].