FEATURE ARTICLE
95
Trouble Ahead: Derailment Is Alive and Well By Yi Zhang Jean Brittain Leslie Kelly M. Hannum
Derailment is a common phenomenon in organizations; however, managers’ derailment can be prevented if the phenomenon is well understood. Derailed managers often have impressive track records and are solidly established within their organizations, but something goes wrong along the way. In this article, we review the dynamics and causes of derailment. We then report survey results from over 2,500 respondents across five countries with differences noted by level, industry, and country. Finally, we describe actions to prevent derailment. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Derailment Defined
D
erailment is a phenomenon in which a manager has reached a certain level but has little chance of future advancement because of a misfit between job requirements and personal skills (Van Velsor & Leslie, 1995). Derailment does not include managers who are not able to reach the top of the corporate pyramid because of the lack of opportunity for promotion or other reasons not related to personal skills. Derailed managers often once had impressive track records and were solidly established within their organizations, but something went wrong along the way. Regardless of their various
successes, the one thing that derailed managers all have in common is that they are eventually demoted, fired, or asked to take early retirement. Derailed managers have had their careers involuntarily halted.
Why It Is Important to Pay Attention to Derailment Potential Over the past decade, scholars who have focused on identifying competencies of effective leadership have largely ignored ineffective or problem behaviors. Many presuppose that ineffective leadership is the absence of effective leadership behaviors. However, another group
Correspondence to: Yi Zhang, College of Business, Zayed University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates,
[email protected].
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. • DOI: 10.1002/tie.21525
96 FEATURE ARTICLE
Regardless of their various successes, the one thing that derailed managers all have in common is that they are eventually demoted, fired, or asked to take early retirement.
and Eichinger (1995), 30% to 50% of high-potential managers and executives derail at some time during their career. Those responsible for talent development and management are, therefore, tasked not only with developing leadership strength, but also with understanding the importance of examining derailment potential within the managerial ranks. Talent development is not only about increasing positive behaviors, but it is also about decreasing problematic behaviors. In order to do so, one must understand the dynamics underlying derailment.
Derailment Dynamics
of researchers has suggested that ineffective leadership is the result of problematic behaviors, rather than the absence of effective behaviors. Focusing on effective leadership models and behaviors has given rise to a strengths-based development approach advocated by a variety of sources. The central message of the strengths-based approach is that people can become successful leaders by focusing on their strengths, that is, by identifying their natural inclinations and fostering their talents. Organizations supporting the strengths-based approach assert that focusing on and addressing weaknesses is a misallocation of limited time, energy, and money. Essentially, they choose to focus on accentuating the positive, rather than “fixing” the negative. We argue that an exclusive focus on strengths in leadership development is insufficient for managers and their organizations because it is only half of the effective leadership story. In addition, strengths can become weaknesses in different settings and becoming competent in certain areas does not address shortcomings in other areas. Not addressing ineffective behaviors can be costly to leaders if those shortcomings result in a derailed career. Derailment can be costly for organizations as well. Direct costs in the form of turnover, loss of profitability, and the exit of strategic company knowledge can sometimes be as high as, or surpass, a manager’s salary. Indirect costs of derailment, such as low morale and poor customer satisfaction, can also take their toll on organizational commitment and productivity. Despite the consequences of derailment, estimates of its pervasiveness are high. According to Lombardo
Derailment may be caused by individual inadequacies such as personality flaws or underdeveloped skills. Organizations often select fast-tracked managers early in their careers because they “fit” organizational and job expectations. These same managers can come “off the track” later when expectations change and they fail to adapt or when things that previously were overlooked as minor personal flaws take on increased importance. Maintaining fit between managers’ skills and abilities and the changing demands of the organization is essential to keeping their careers “on track.” High-potential and fast-tracked managers can easily become derailed if the individual or the organization fails to take an active hand in addressing the potential for derailment. Center for Creative Leadership research shows there are specific dynamics that can lead to or reveal derailment potential. Simply stated, strengths overused may become weaknesses. The very strengths that made the person successful can become liabilities in situations where other skills are needed. For example, a manager who is seen as resolute and decisive in a functional line manager role could be seen as rigid or inflexible if he or she is promoted to a more cross-functional role and fails to adapt as changing organizational demands and situations require. Weaknesses and flaws that did not matter previously or that were forgiven in light of strengths or results may become more obvious in a new situation. For example, managers who have difficulty building relationships may perform adequately in a role in which they have established relationships, but fail when he or she is promoted to a role in which they need to form relationships with a new group of stakeholders. Common circumstances that can elevate managers’ flaws include reporting to a new boss (especially if the previous boss covered or compensated for weaknesses), a promotion to a radically different job, a reorganization, or an expatriate assignment.
Thunderbird International Business Review Vol. 55, No. 1 January/February 2013
DOI: 10.1002/tie
Trouble Ahead: Derailment Is Alive and Well 97
Common circumstances that can elevate managers’ flaws include reporting to a new boss (especially if the previous boss covered or compensated for weaknesses), a promotion to a radically different job, a reorganization, or an expatriate assignment. Finally, a manager’s success can lead to arrogance or the mistaken belief that he or she is infallible and needs no one else. This often occurs at precisely the time when these assumptions are least viable.
once-successful managers can become poor performers. Some managers are unable to complete a job, due to a lack of drive, a lack of hard work, or failure to follow through on promises. Some are so ambitious they spend more time promoting themselves than doing their jobs. At times, these managers are perceived as betraying trust or as unjustifiably self-promoting in their efforts to reach higher levels in the organization. During the course of CCL research, managers who derailed because they were unable to meet business objectives were described as easily overwhelmed, over committed, and/or over confident of their abilities. •
Problems with relationships. As managers move up in the organization, they often are judged on how well they manage relationships with peers, direct reports, customers, board members, and others. The inability to work with others separates managers who derail from those who succeed. This derailment characteristic describes managers who are seen as insensitive, manipulative, critical, demanding, and not trustworthy. In general, managers who derail for this reason are unable to interact with and respond to others in ways that create positive relationships.
•
Difficulty changing and adapting. Managers derail because they are unable or unwilling to adapt for any number of reasons. Some are unable to change their management style and are not flexible when the demands of the job change. Others are unable to learn from feedback and mistakes or to change their old behaviors. Managers who are unable or unwilling to adapt are also described as being risk averse, defensive, unable to handle pressure, and not strategic in their thinking.
•
Difficulty building and leading a team. Managers who derail for this reason experience failure because they did not select and build the right team and/or did not manage subordinates. As managers move up the career ladder, getting results is still important, but getting results through influencing rather than through the use of command, control, and position becomes critical. Instead of being the one to do the work, the manager must identify and hire the right people.
•
Too narrow managerial experiences. This describes managers who cannot work effectively outside of their current function. When managers move into higher-level positions, they are often expected to work effectively across functions and to take a more systemic perspective. All the managers who derailed for this reason were successful within their organizational function but when moved into general management positions
Derailment Causes Few researchers have looked at derailment over career stages. Examining derailment issues over time is particularly important because, unlike the studies of already derailed managers, they offer suggestions to prevent derailment before it is too late. Shipper and Dillard (2000) found that managers who are derailing have different skill profiles at all career stages than successful managers. Their research supports the notion that strengths can become weaknesses and blind spots can take on increasing importance as one’s career progresses. A variety of studies conducted over two decades at the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) have concluded that there are five specific undesirable qualities or flaws that hamper career success. These five characteristics form the basis of the survey developed for the current study and are described below. •
Failing to meet business objectives. Poor performance seems like an obvious derailment factor. If managers aren’t doing the required work, then they probably won’t keep their jobs. What is less obvious is how
DOI: 10.1002/tie
Thunderbird International Business Review Vol. 55, No. 1 January/February 2013
98 FEATURE ARTICLE
they were unable to shift their perspective to see the big picture.
FIGURE
2 Derailment Potential at Different Managerial Levels
Derailment Today In order to better understand the extent to which derailment is alive and well in organizations, we surveyed 2,679 managers of varying levels in five countries and two different sectors regarding their perceptions of derailment potential. We asked managers to rate five items— difficulty building and leading a team, difficulty changing or adapting, failing to meet business objectives, problems with relationships, and too narrow managerial experience—according to the extent to which each was a problem for managers at their level. The group being assessed was defined as “managers at your organization and level in their current job.” We also asked the managers to rate how well they knew the group they were rating. Ninetyseven percent of managers indicated that they knew the group quite well or extremely well. In this section, we focus on managers’ perceptions of their derailment potential overall, by level, sector, and country based on the data we gathered. This information provides an overview of which derailment causes are more (or less) prevalent across different groups of managers. Figure 1 illustrates the extent to which managers felt each of the five derailment causes was a problem for managers at their level. The percentages reflect the number of managers who gave a high rating (7, 8, or 9 on a 9-point scale) to the derailment cause listed. Managers overall rated their highest derailment potential in the areas of too narrow managerial experience and difficulty building and leading a team. This suggests that these are two areas where managers need support and developmental opportunities. We offer more specific advice for addressing these issues in the next section. •
Level differences: Managers at different organizational levels have different perceptions of their derailment potential (see Figure 2). Midlevel managers tend to
FIGURE
1 Derailment Potential for Managers Overall
Thunderbird International Business Review Vol. 55, No. 1 January/February 2013
rate their derailment potential lower than managers at other organizational levels. Managers at higher levels, especially managers at the upper-middle management level, may feel more pressure associated with greater risks in their roles. Our data reveal that top-level managers also perceive they have greater potential to derail because they have too narrow managerial experiences. Perhaps the pressures these managers face make them more aware of the need for greater exposure across the organization. This suggests managers and HR professionals may want to focus their efforts differently based on managerial level. •
Sector differences: Results suggest that the potential for and causes of derailment may vary across sectors. Our study looked at the financial services and information technology (IT) sectors. These two industries were picked for comparison because of their history of steady growth internationally and the comparability of the sectors across countries. Overall, managers in the financial services sector perceive themselves to be
Our data reveal that toplevel managers also perceive they have greater potential to derail because they have too narrow managerial experiences.
DOI: 10.1002/tie
Trouble Ahead: Derailment Is Alive and Well 99
less likely to derail than managers in the IT sector (see Figure 3). Both IT and financial services managers perceive the potential to derail in the area of too narrow managerial experience. •
Country differences: The potential for derailment varies across countries. This study shows that managers in the United States perceive they are less likely to derail than managers in Asian countries (see Figure 4). In general, Japanese managers perceive the greatest potential for derailment. Managers in Hong Kong reported higher ratings (20%) than the other countries on too narrow managerial experience, while managers in India (20%) rated difficulty building and leading a team a potential problem in their organizations as compared to managers in other countries.
These results also demonstrate that there are trends to consider regardless of country. Team building and exposure to broader managerial experiences are important to avoid derailment. Sadly, but not surprisingly, managers reported the ability to build teams is a problem among their peers. Globalization and technology bring many opportunities for businesses while at the
same time they challenge old business environments and create new, complex working environments. The changing dynamics of the workplace (for example, advancing technology, team-based workforces, and globalization) and resulting changes in organizational structures (for example, matrixed organizations and demographically diverse workforces) have made the need to build teams and networks critical. Now, more than ever, the ability to work cooperatively across cultures is paramount. Looking for opportunities to develop broader managerial exposure has also been shown to be of value. The term silo effect is sometimes used to characterize situations in organizations where individuals and groups do not communicate or collaborate across functions. Managers who have had an upward career progression in the same function, with limited or no exposure to other functions, can find themselves in a position of derailment. When it is time for managers to move into executive roles, their ability to succeed is hampered by their lack of awareness about the whole organization or competitive landscape. This lack of awareness has a negative impact on the managers and the organizations.
What to Do about Derailment FIGURE
3 Derailment Potential in IT and Finance Industries
In this section we provide advice for three situations: when you are headed for derailment, when someone who works for you is headed for derailment; and what organizations can do to prevent derailment. You may want to select or highlight certain strategies or areas for development based on the manager’s (or your) situation or your organization’s situation.
What You Can Do to Reduce Your Derailment Potential
FIGURE
•
Take a 360-degree assessment instrument to increase your awareness of potential problems that can lead to derailment. You may want to select an assessment that measures your strengths (effective leadership behaviors) as well as your weaknesses (ineffective leadership behaviors), so you have a balanced perspective of your leadership. While you may have a sense of the areas in which you are most likely to derail, it is good to check your assumptions in case there are blind spots.
•
Solicit feedback on a routine basis. Periodically ask your manager, your peers, your direct reports, and other important people with whom you work if there are areas where you could be more effective. Speak with them at regular intervals or ask them to provide feedback. If you prefer, written feedback may be anonymous.
4 Derailment Potential across Five Countries
DOI: 10.1002/tie
Thunderbird International Business Review Vol. 55, No. 1 January/February 2013
100 FEATURE ARTICLE
•
Take responsibility for your own development. Compare your strengths and weaknesses in relation to the skills and demands needed to be successful in your current job. If needed, consult your manager, a mentor, a coach, or your HR department to more clearly understand the demands and expectations. Create a development a plan.
•
Learn what skills and abilities are needed in positions you aspire to through observations, interviews, and available organizational information. As you progress through different levels and across the organization, new frameworks and behaviors are required. Seeking support and coaching during these transitions is critical. Set up a development plan to fill any gaps between your skills, knowledge, and abilities and those of successful managers in roles you aspire to hold.
•
What Your Organization Can Do to Reduce Derailment Potential •
Offer zigzag (or lateral plus vertical movement) career paths over vertical movement alone. Exposing managers to different areas of the organization can broaden their perspective as well as help them build critical relationships. It can also provide an opportunity for managers to gain different perspectives on themselves. The key is to introduce this zigzag career path before promoting managers into general management positions.
•
Provide support and coaching for managers during transitions. Managers need to not only be prepared for new roles, but once in place, they need to be supported in them. Consider offering mentors, coaches, or advisors to help employees during times of career transitions. Transitions can include new roles or expanded responsibilities within a role.
•
Provide information about the behaviors and expectations required in the job. Job descriptions typically focus more on the qualifications and tasks required for the job than the behavioral expectations. However, the behavioral elements of the job can become more important at higher organizational levels. Before taking a job, employees need to know what behaviors are required and they need to assess their proficiency in those behaviors. Providing employees with a realistic job preview can help them better prepare for success in that role.
•
Offer assessments of potential problems as well as strengths. Providing employees with insight on their strengths as well as their weaknesses can help them form a balanced view of their leadership behaviors.
•
Offer training on how to provide effective feedback and reinforce the need for ongoing feedback from different sources across career stages. It is difficult to work on something if you don’t know it is a problem. If employees know how to deliver effective feedback and are encouraged to do so, it is more likely that derailment behaviors can be identified and addressed sooner.
What You Can Do to Reduce the Derailment Potential of Others •
•
•
•
Determine what motivates your direct reports and pay attention to it. Messages about areas of weakness can be difficult for people to hear and they can be demotivating. If messages about areas for improvement are coupled with opportunities that excite employees, it is less likely they will feel like failures and will withdraw. Be clear about the demands and expectations of the job, including behavioral components. For example, if having effective relationships with certain people or groups is important, make sure employees know it is important, why it is important, and the consequences of not paying attention to that needed behavior. What seems obvious to you may not be obvious to others. Hire individuals who can contribute to your group in diverse ways so that you have a balanced, complementary group. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses. Ideally, group members have different strengths and weaknesses. It may be just fine if one person has a narrow functional orientation, but if everyone in a group does there is more potential for problems. Having a diverse group can also create learning opportunities as members can be role models and advisors to other members. Delegate and empower your group. One of the best ways for people to learn is by doing. Creating opportunities for group members to build and practice new behaviors can be more effective that talking about them. If you are providing an opportunity with a specific development goal in mind, talk to your staff member about why they have been given the assignment and what you hope they will learn from it.
Thunderbird International Business Review Vol. 55, No. 1 January/February 2013
Deal with problem employees in a direct, timely manner. It can be hard to tell someone when they are not performing as expected or required. However, the longer you delay the conversation the more opportunity there is for the issue to get out of hand and for others to get the impression that either you do not see the issue or you cannot handle it. If there is a problem, address it as early as possible in a positive way, ideally providing the person with information and the opportunity to change the behavior.
DOI: 10.1002/tie
Trouble Ahead: Derailment Is Alive and Well 101
Conclusion Different companies address derailment in different ways. In a poll conducted by the Center for Creative Leadership in 2003, only 10% of the respondents indicated that their organization would quickly dismiss poor performers. The most common treatment was to try to improve performance through training, mentoring, or other developmental activities. Less than half the people polled would do nothing or would move the problem employee to a dead end job or department. Unfortunately, the costs of carrying poor performers can have a ripple effect across the organization by destroying morale and bringing down employee’s performance. Strategies to reduce derailment are of critical importance. Now, more than ever, executives need to focus their attention and energy on retaining talented employees and keeping them actively engaged in the organization. Other results of the poll indicated that the majority of respondents (61%) use group workshops and/or seminars by external providers to prevent derailment. Fortyeight percent use tests or assessments like 360-degree feedback, and 46% use group workshops and/or seminars by internal providers or individual development with a coach, mentor, or manager. Whichever strategy you or your organization uses to increase bench strength and develop talent, our research provides evidence that organizations need to focus on their derailment potential and actively work to reduce their impact on leaders. Unlike popular strength-based development approaches, this research further suggests that paying attention only to strengths may not address what the organization needs.
Now, more than ever, executives need to focus their attention and energy on retaining talented employees and keeping them actively engaged in the organization. Derailment does not mean the end of a manager’s career. Derailed managers leave their organizations and go to an organization where their skills are a better fit or start their own business with success. But this approach to turning around derailment is costly to organizations, especially when actions can be taken to prevent the situation from getting to that point.
Acknowledgments The Center for Creative Leadership gratefully acknowledges the Singapore Economic Development Board and TATA Management Training Center for their support of this research. The authors appreciate comments from anonymous reviewers of an earlier draft of this article.
Yi Zhang holds her PhD in Business Administration from Michael Smurfit Business School, University College Dublin, Ireland. She now works in College of Business, Zayed University. Before she joined Zayed University, she had worked in EMLyon Business School, Lingnan University and Center for Creative Leadership. She has published research articles in international journals including International Journal of Human Resource Management, Journal of General Management, Journal of Asian Business Study, and Leadership in Action. She has also published over 20 research articles in Chinese peer-reviewed journals and book chapters. Jean Brittain Leslie is a senior manager in the Tools & Instrument Development Group and a Senior Fellow at the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) in Greensboro, North Carolina. In this role, she is responsible for architecting, designing, and integrating instruments and tools into CCL and other organizations’ leadership development systems. Jean has published over 58 writings on leadership, assessment, and feedback in the form of books, book chapters, peer-reviewed articles, and articles in the popular press. She has an MA in sociology from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
DOI: 10.1002/tie
Thunderbird International Business Review Vol. 55, No. 1 January/February 2013
102 FEATURE ARTICLE
Kelly M. Hannum is manager of research for the EMEA Region at the Center for Creative Leadership. She holds a PhD in educational research, measurement, and evaluation from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. She is a visiting faculty member at Catholic University’s IESEG School of Management in Lille, France, and teaches graduate courses at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. She is the recipient of the Marcia Guttentag award from the American Evaluation Association and Young Alumni Awards from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro and Guilford College.
References Lombardo, M. M., & Eichinger, R. W. (1995). Preventing derailment: What to do before it’s too late. Greensboro, NC: CCL Press. Shipper, F., & Dillard, J. E., Jr. (2000). A study of impending derailment
and recovery of middle managers across career stages. Human Resource Management, 39(4), 331–345. Van Velsor, E., & Leslie, J. B. (1995). Why executives derail: perspectives across time and cultures. Academy of Management Executive, 9(4), 62–72.
About the Research In 2008, researchers at the Center for Creative Leadership studied perceptions of derailment using data from a total of 2,670 managers from five countries: Singapore (n = 953), India (n = 442), Japan (n = 249), The United States (n = 805), and Hong Kong (n = 221). The managers worked in 15 different companies in the IT (n = 808) and financial services sector (n = 1862). The respondents represent four different levels of management: middle (52.4%), upper-middle (27.4%), senior (12.0%), and executive (4.6%). On average, they have lived in their current country for 33 years, worked in their current positions for about six years, and are 41 years old. The majority of the sample is male (68%). The focus of the 2003 study was keeping managers’ careers on track. The online poll explored readers' thoughts on why managers derail, how their organizations handle weak performers, and what’s being done to prevent derailment. Two hundred twenty-four individuals responded to the poll. The vast majority of respondents were above the age of 35 and in middle management or more senior roles. Men and women made up an even share of the poll respondents.
Thunderbird International Business Review Vol. 55, No. 1 January/February 2013
DOI: 10.1002/tie
