The Rhetoric and Reality 1

Running head: THE RHETORIC AND REALITY

The Rhetoric and Reality of Fast Track Management Development Programs

Kevin Kuznia

St. Ambrose University

 The Rhetoric and Reality 2

Abstract

As organizations become more complex and dynamic, so does the need for effective leadership

identification and development. A number of firms have utilized fast track management

development programs as part of their management development effort in an attempt to meet the

challenges of globalization, new technologies, competitive pressures and customer demands.

Unlike conventional management development programs, the fast track management

development program approach relies heavily on frequent job rotations and other special

opportunities to accelerate the management development process. This paper will explore the

current research related to fast track management development programs and the outcomes that

managers and organizations can expect when participating in a fast track management

development program. A model will be developed to contrast the rhetoric with the reality in an

attempt to discern how these programs can be adapted to meet current management development

challenges.
 The Rhetoric and Reality 3

The Rhetoric and Reality of Fast Track Management Development Programs

How are the future leaders of an organization selected? How are those future leaders

developed? Organizations today are implementing a multitude of tools to identify management

potential, along with intensive efforts to develop those future leaders (Lane, Blakely, &

Martinec, 1992). Fast track management development programs are being used as an integral

part of today’s management development effort as organizations use this development process to

help identify leadership potential, outline areas for growth, and supplement managerial skills

(Saari, Johnson, McLaughlin, & Zimmerle, 1988). In addition, many organizations are flattening

the organizational hierarchy, eliminating a solid career progression (Allread, Snow, & Miles,

1996). Can the promise of a fast track development program effectively attract managerial talent

and meet the progression needs of both the organization and potential managers?

The goal of this paper is to present a framework for gaining an understanding of the

perceived benefits of fast track management development programs and the potential role that

these programs can play in advancing the management development activities of the organization

as well as the management candidate. We can then use this framework to more precisely map,

evaluate, and compare the types of processes used within these programs to discern what

processes are most effective and identify those that may not be. Since there are so few guidelines

to follow in developing and managing such a program (Harris & Feild, 1991), we can start to

map out a plan that will help us most effectively support the development and placement of the

potential manager.

A starting point to understanding the fast track management development program is

distinguishing the difference between classical management development efforts that involve the

employee exchanging corporate loyalty for a steady progression up the organizational hierarchy
 The Rhetoric and Reality 4

(Derr, Jones, & Toomey, 1988; Iles, 1997) and fast track development programs which rely more

on accelerating the development of the potential manager using frequent job rotations and other

special opportunities not commonly available to other employees – all within a condensed

timeframe (Larsen, 1997).

While consistent definitions of “fast track management development programs” really

don’t exist, many observers make the distinction that the term refers to a formalized

developmental program tailored to a few select participants who are recognized to have upper

level managerial talent (Harris & Feild, 1991). Those chosen for the program are typically those

individuals within an organization who are recognized – at least in that point in time – as the

organization’s future leaders (Cope, 1998). In addition, those individuals chosen for the program

share five commonalities: They are individuals who are “(1) picked early in their careers (Derr et

al., 1988; Heisler & Benham, 1992; Kovach, 1986), (2) engage in a fast rate of lateral movement

(Iles, 1997), (3) maintain a carefully monitored career (Viney, Adamson, & Doherty, 1997), (4)

receive special coaching or mentoring (Hall, 1995) and (5) are expected to quickly ascend to

leadership positions (Heisler & Benham, 1992; Viney et al., 1997.

There are many reasons why an organization would want to incorporate a fast track

management development program for potential managers. Obviously the main reason would be

for accelerated development of managers, but this process can also be used for attracting

potential employees to the organization (Derr et al., 1988; Feild & Harris, 1991), retaining

employees (Ettore, 1997; Iles, 1997), monitoring and maintaining a stock of managerial talent

(Feild & Harris, 1991; Viney, et al., 1997), obtaining competitive advantages (Harris & Feild,

1991; Larsen, 1997; McClelland, 1994; Ready, Vicere, & White, 1994), and reinforcing or

reshaping of organizational strategy (Gunz & Jalland, 1996; Harris & Feild, 1991; Viney et al.,
 The Rhetoric and Reality 5

1997). What are the purported benefits that fast track management development programs

provide to the participant? Customary benefits having exposure to the business environment,

gaining a broader strategic focus, and receiving more in-depth knowledge of that organization’s

particular business (McCall, 1998; Northcraft, Griffith, & Shalley, 1991; Saari et al., 1988).

I will start this analysis of fast track management development programs with a brief

discussion of how an organization would determine if there were a need for such a program. I

will then go into a discussion of the candidate identification and selection process. This will lead

into a discussion on the types of developmental exercises the participant would be engaged in,

along with potential problems with those activities. Given the above, I will then discuss how to

align the best aspects of those developmental tools with the reality of today’s business

environment.

Assessing Organizational Need

It is readily apparent that businesses today need to select and develop high potential

employees to manage in complex business environments (Burke, 1997; Feild & Harris, 1991;

Fulmer & Goldsmith, 2000). Sponsored mobility programs meet this need by selecting

individuals as early in their careers as possible and then giving them specialized career

development opportunities allowing those individuals to assume leadership positions as early as

possible (Heisler & Benham, 1992).

Oftentimes, organizations do not take the important first step in clearly identifying the

business need for a high potential management development program (McCauley, Lombardo, &

Usher, 1989). As Zemke (1999) points out, that organizations need to assess “why there is a gap

between the performance the organization requires and current performance” (p. 166). The

organization must be very explicit in identifying how the management development effort will
 The Rhetoric and Reality 6

support business strategy, improve competitive advantage and fulfill future leadership needs

(Burke, 1997; Hall, 1995; Patton & Pratt, 2002; Ready et al., 1994). In essence, the organization

needs to ensure that management development processes will utilize their potential managerial

resources most effectively (McCauley et al., 1989).

To help fill this gap, the organization should perform a management needs assessment

(MNA). The obvious purpose of a MNA is to create a gap analysis to determine where the

optimal performance levels of management talent should be, and then measure against the actual

performance levels currently being achieved (Digman, 1980). The objective is to have a clear

understanding of both the immediate and long-term skills needed for management performance

and prepare potential mangers to assume managerial roles (Temperley, 1994). An organization’s

possible objectives may include succession planning, implementing competitive strategies or

changing organizational culture (Ready et al., 1994). The outcome of the MNA should guide the

sponsors of the program to have clear objectives on the definition of functions and competency

levels that will be required in the management development program (Ready et al., 1994).

As an example, according to the research, there is a weak link between business strategy

and management development objectives (Hall, 1995; McCall, 1998). To have the maximum

impact, the high potential management development program must be based on an explicit

strategy that is linked to the business strategy (Hall, 1995). If there are no clear objectives on

how the high potential management program will support the organization’s strategy, the

program design will miss the mark and not achieve the desired objectives.

Once the MNA is complete and clear program objectives are determined, the

management candidates can be selected. The next section will discuss how candidates are

identified and selected for fast track development programs.

 The Rhetoric and Reality 7

The Fast Track Management Identification and Selection Process

Once it has been established that an organization will benefit from a fast track

management development process, participants (those individuals who will be identified as high

potentials and who will be participating in the program) must be selected. The effectiveness of

any high potential management development program hinges on the quality of participants

(Harris & Feild, 1991), organizational support (Peterson, 2002), and the types of rotations/job

experiences that the participants will be exposed.

Organizations identify and select management incumbents through a number of decision

factors in an attempt to get the best candidates. These management selection “criteria” typically

include level of education, previous work experience, performance within the organization,

comparison to a model list of leadership competencies (Cope, 1998) and supervisory assessment

of leadership potential (Burke, 1997). Oftentimes, organizations make management selection

decisions based on large elements of subjectivity, rather than the objectivity needed to give

justice to the process (Coaley, Knightley & Beard, 1993).

An organization has essentially two options in which to select management candidates.

The organization could look inside the company to select candidates. Internal selection gives the

organization the advantage of knowing some of the work history of the candidate and can get

direct feedback from those who work with the candidate to verify past performance. However,

many organizations choose to select candidates from external sources. Typically these sources

include highly rated business schools, and other organizations. The risk of course is that the

management candidate’s track record is unknown to the organization and the candidate may

potentially be a mismatch for the program.

 The Rhetoric and Reality 8

If a firm chooses to select the management candidate from its internal candidate pool,

most organizations place the most weight on input from direct supervisors to identify high

potential candidates rather than using a list of attributes or assessments of future potential

(Burke, 1997; Derr, et al., 1988). In addition, many organizations use employee appraisals and

performance reviews to identify and earmark those with potential (Viney, et al., 1997). This

process, combined with supervisor input, should yield the best candidates available to the

organization.

Regardless of the process for candidate selection, it is important to note that careful

attention must be given to the strategy of the organization. Linking program objectives to the

selection criteria will set the stage for a successful management development program.

Once the MNA is complete and clear program objectives are determined, the most

effective developmental methods and approaches can be designed and implemented to meet

those particular management development needs (Ready et al., 1994). Examples of approaches

that may be applicable include task force assignments, predefined job rotations, formal education

or other developmental activities (Ready, et al., 1994).

Developing Managerial Talent on the Fast Track

In this section I will examine the most common developmental processes in fast track

management development programs. The section below is what I term the “rhetoric” or what

both the management candidate and the organization believe are the best developmental

processes and resulting benefits gained from participating in a high potential management

development program. Those processes are Job Rotations, Special Assignments, Coaching and

Mentoring, and Specific Skills Training.

 The Rhetoric and Reality 9

Job Rotations

In a study conducted by Derr et al. (1988), it was found that 84 percent of firms that offer

high potential management development use job rotations as the primary tool for development.

Job rotations provide the program participants with a “macro-view” of the organization, its

business environment and strategy in preparation for top management positions (Burke, 1997). In

addition, research has consistently shown that the number of different positions held by an

employee is directly related to career advancement (Burke, 1997).

The purpose of job rotations or lateral moves is to enhance job specific knowledge or to

increase the breath of knowledge (Burke, 1997). It is important to ensure the proper mix of

rotations to allow the management candidate to experience those opportunities that are tied to the

program’s objectives. Typical rotations include sales, finance, and human resources. Given the

new business reality, international assignments are becoming increasingly important (Hall, 1995;

Keys & Wolfe, 1988). However, the most beneficial mix of rotations will vary depending upon

business environment and the organization’s strategy. As an example, if the organization wants

to capitalize on emerging opportunities, the management candidate, as part of the development

experience, should be rotated through a research and development position. Placing the candidate

into a human resources position may not give the participant the exposure to emerging

opportunities necessary to support the organization’s strategy.

According to Derr et al., (1988) there is no research to support the ideal number of

rotations/job experiences those participants will be subjected to, however, management

development specialists usually call for a 3 to 5 year “grooming period” (Viney et al., 1997).

During this time, the participant is expected to start to develop the advanced management skills
 The Rhetoric and Reality 10

required in the organization, orient him or herself to all aspects of the organization and gain an

understanding of the business (Viney et al., 1997).

Regardless of the positions the management candidate is rotated into, it is important that

that he or she has a clear indication of the skills and specific competencies that need to be

developed. In future positions, management candidates will be required to conceptualize,

negotiate and implement mutually beneficial solutions from a cross-functional perspective

gained from the rotations the management candidate has been exposed (Allread et al., 1996).

Another important consideration is the length of tenure in the “rotated assignment”. It is

critical that the high potential employee maximizes his or her development and contribution in

each assignment. If the incumbent manager is rotated too quickly, accountability may become an

issue and the manager’s credibility called into question. Organizations typically give the

incumbent 1 to 3 years in each rotation, but research has yet to examine an ideal length of time

that managers should spend in their rotational assignments (Burke, 1997).

Special Assignments

Due to the growing complexity, interdependencies and turbulence found in business,

most organizations have introduced special assignments to increase the experience of

management development candidates (Keys & Wolfe, 1988). Experience is a powerful reinforcer

of the new concepts, skills and behaviors expected of the new manager (Keys & Wolfe, 1988).

Special assignments are discrete and temporary assignments to work on issues facing an

organization. Examples include installing a new system, negotiating agreements with suppliers,

or learning about new products or processes within the organization or industry. In exposing the

manager to this type of role, he or she may experience the pressure or stress of organizational life

and learn to rely more on tacit knowledge rather than be given explicit instructions on how to
 The Rhetoric and Reality 11

deal with specific problems. It is often in these positions that high potential management

candidates get their first taste of the difficulties of working in an organization, especially dealing

with people and the realities of getting things done in a complex system (McCall, 1998). The

goal of these special assignments is to teach such lessons as endurance, team building, setting

priorities, and planning and organization (Heisler & Benham, 1992).

Coaching and Mentoring

Less formal than the previous two developmental aspects, coaching and mentoring is

seen as a key tool for managerial development. These coaching and mentoring experiences are

often linked to specific skills required to be developed by the participant. Coaching and

mentoring is working with a senior member of the management team in an organization and it is

expected that the manager or coach will share his or her insights and lessons from their past

experiences (Peterson, 2002). However, some organizations may hire coaches external to the

company. Coaching can also provide the employee with additional reliable feedback about

performance effectiveness and offer the management candidate suggestions on how to best

improve performance (Cummings & Oldham, 1997). Coaching is quite like mentoring and in

addition, according to Peterson (2002) coaching “paints development with a broader brush, it

enhances the process of learning and helps for creating the conditions to occur” (p. 161).

Coaching and mentoring provides the fast track management candidate with specific functional

guidance showing them important organizational perspectives and points out improvements in

interpersonal and management skills (Kovach, 1988). And on a more subtle aspect, many

individuals have found that coaching and mentoring provide perceptive aspects to organizational

life, such as learning the corporate culture, and providing up and coming managers sufficient

political preparation (Keys & Wolfe, 1988).

 The Rhetoric and Reality 12

Specific Skills Training

In the classical management development sense, most employee training addresses

current problems or deficiencies and organizations vary widely in the amount and types of

training they provide to develop their managers. These practices result in most managers being

forced to develop their management skills on the job through trial and error (Patton & Pratt,

2002).

In an attempt to improve managers’ abilities to contend with change and growth, many

organizations offer in house seminars and non-degree short courses tailored to an organization’s

specific needs (Derr et al., 1988; Heisler & Benham, 1992). Typically, the goals of these

programs include further development of management skills and broadening one’s perspective,

however, there is an increased emphasis on developing diverse skills such as understanding the

international aspects of business and managing change (Heisler & Benham, 1992; Vicere,

Taylor, & Freeman, 1994). Typical topics include leadership, strategy and cultural change.

The perceived benefits of these programs include addressing specific organizational

needs, developing an organization’s culture, building teams, internal networking and providing a

discussion forum or idea exchange (Vicere et al., 1994). The intensive interaction with the high

potential manager’s peers and subordinates is seen as another important feature of specific skills

training (Derr et al., 1988).

On the face of it, the high potential management development program is quite attractive.

The organization identifies the employees with the highest potential, sponsors an accelerated

development process, monitors their performance to assure that they are meeting high

expectations, and they are ready for a future management vacancy in the organization (Foxman,

& Polsky, 1988; Larsen, 1997; Viney et al., 1997). The candidate has developed a psychological
 The Rhetoric and Reality 13

contract (Rousseau, 1996) with the firm that states that he or she through rapid promotions is in

line for a top position within the organization. In theory this would appear to be a win-win

situation for both the organization and the high potential candidate. However, the reality states

something different.

Problems with the Fast Track in Today’s World

In this section I will evaluate the effectiveness of these four components of fast track

programs in light of today’s business environment. The section below is what I term the “reality”

or what both the management candidate and the organization actually receive by being involved

in high potential management development.

There has been increasing skepticism about high potential management development

programs (Burke, 1997; Larsen, 1997). As mentioned earlier, most high potential management

development programs rely extensively on job rotations and special assignments (Larsen, 1997).

Due to the high potential candidate’s limited tenure within a certain job, the incumbent manager

may be reluctant to give out important assignments and instead assign “busy work” to the fast

track participant. This has lead to managers that have acquired little technical expertise yet have

an emphasis on short-term results (Derr, et al., 1988; Feild & Harris, 1991; Heisler & Benham,

1992; Illes, 1997; Kovach, 1986). In addition, because they have progressed so fast, the program

participant did not have enough time within each assignment to develop a network of

relationships in which support and learning could take place (Hall, 1999). Therefore, this can

lead to non-participants not providing the support necessary for the high potential manager to

adequately develop the basic knowledge and skills required. Furthermore, non-participants may

resent and subterfuge assignments due to the lack of their own participation in the program (Hall,

1999; Larsen, London, Weinstein, & Raghuram, 1998).

 The Rhetoric and Reality 14

As discussed earlier, another key component of high potential development programs is

the mentoring and coaching processes that participants are encouraged to engage in (Derr, et al.,

1988). To promote this, some organizations may bring in external coaches to help in the

management candidate’s development (Peterson, 2002). The problem however, is that mentoring

or coaching cannot be forced onto a participant or potential mentor (Hall, 1995). Participants

oftentimes fail to understand the process and frequently have unrealistic expectations about

benefits of coaching (Keys & Wolfe, 1988). Coaching is not intended to “fix” deficiencies, but

rather to guide the high potential candidate in self-awareness and to be aware of those areas that

may benefit from some behavior change. In addition, due to the high velocity position change

that is part of the management development process, a true mentoring relationship may not

become mature. Establishing mentor relationships takes time and effort. To be most effective, the

mentor and protégé have a common understanding of the relationship and tie the objectives to

specific job learning needs and to the strategic direction of the organization (Hall, 1995).

Like any training, the problem with high potential management specific skills training is

that it is not always used effectively. Although organizations spend a great deal of resources in

developing and delivering training programs, they do not always fully integrate the training with

the strategic concept of the development program (McCall, 1998). Oftentimes, the training is so

generalized that it fails to address the specific requirements of the high potential management

candidate. The management candidate requires training geared to a higher level to support the

advanced skills of a future executive. Therefore, the training becomes an expensive and isolated

event with little lasting impact (McCall, 1998).

 The Rhetoric and Reality 15

Fast Track Programs and the Psychological Contract

A rarely discussed aspect of the fast track management development program is the

psychological contract that exists between the employee and organization. The employee

believes that because of this high potential status, he or she will quickly ascend the corporate

ladder. This results in an implied psychological contract between the employee and the

organization. However, the changing nature of careers within organizations does not always

support this premise (Gunn, 1998; Rousseau, 1996). High potential development programs work

best in organizations in which career ladders and paths still exist (Baruch & Peiperi, 1997).

However, over the past two decades, careers have moved away from traditional and hierarchical

to more horizontal ones (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Viney et al., 1997). It seems that large

organizations, having once developed vertical career paths, must now refocus their efforts on

motivating employees through offering them greater skill improvement (Arthur & Rousseau,

1996). This has eroded the psychological contract that many fast trackers have been laboring

under (Rousseau, 1996; Viney et al., 1997). As organizational restructuring, downsizing and

reengineering have accelerated; psychological contracts have shifted from employment security

to employability security (Iles, 1997; Rousseau, 1996). All employees, including managers, must

now must take responsibility for their own career progression (Iles, 1997; London, 1983).

Is There Hope for the Fast Track?

In large organizations, career paths for high potentials still exist, but they are no longer

the principle routes to success (Baruch & Peiperi, 1997). A new model has emerged for talented

employees. That model stresses professional development as opposed to upward progression and

long-term employment within a single organization (Viney et al., 1997). To state it another way,

the emphasis is on employability and marketability within an industry as opposed to tenure

 The Rhetoric and Reality 16

within a single organization (Rousseau, 1996; Viney et al., 1997). “Employability is giving

employees the opportunity to develop competitive skills that are transferable from job to job

within or outside the organization” (Viney et al., 1997, pp. 184).

Due to these changes, a high potential management development program cannot be like

the traditional model of the past (Larsen, 1997). The program must place more emphasis on the

employability aspect of development as opposed to organization specific skills (Rousseau,

1995). The key decision points identified and examined here can increase understanding of how

to assess the need for, the design of, and the subsequent delivery of a management development

program in today’s business environment. Criteria for identifying and selecting training models,

justifying and explaining the program to potential participants (as well as non-participants),

timing, and evaluation mechanisms all must be weighed and considered carefully in light of

these new business realities.

In order for a management development program to be truly effective, the management

development team must be prepared to look at an organization’s culture, organizational

infrastructure, management support, process orientation, clarity of vision, and its current level of

management development structure (Garvin, 1993; Iles, Forster & Tinline, 1996; Fulmer &

Goldsmith, 2000; Larsen, 1997 Pan & Scarbrough, 1999; Wright & Belcourt, 1994).

Organizations typically are slow to change and can very often resist attempts of implementation

of new techniques and work procedures (Huczynski & Lewis, 1980).

In response to the above, I have developed four interrelated implementation challenges

that should be kept in focus as the management development program is developed. First,

management development is a complex and long term process, and unfortunately, there are no

quick or simple answers to the question, “How should we develop our managers?” (Huczynski &
 The Rhetoric and Reality 17

Lewis, 1980; Wexley & Baldwin, 1986). Management training program developers typically

design and conduct their programs as if they were independent of the organization’s strategy, as

opposed to linking the program’s objectives with the strategic focus of the organization (Heisler

& Benham, 1992; McClelland, 1994). To make the link effective, the executives of the

organization, in partnership with the management development staff need to recognize the need

to encourage managers to give participants challenging assignments and then require the

participant to be able to demonstrate a certain level of expertise tied to the strategic intent of the

organization and subsequently require the participant to be accountable for results. In

formulating a comprehensive strategy for management development, the organization needs to

consider linking the developmental opportunities to current projects.

Second, any form of effective management development will only occur in an

organization that is truly committed to employee advancement (Garvin, 1993; Wright &

Belcourt, 1994). Incumbent management and management candidates must be committed to the

process of learning and application of knowledge and skills or else the process of management

development is likely to fail (Margerison, 1992). This is a difficult challenge, but it is essential

for success. Organizations that approach management development as simply training and

assume that this will be sufficient for imparting skills to future managers will not be very

successful. Effective management development, by contrast, cultivates a culture where

knowledge is inherent and helps the organization as well as its employees reduce costs, increase

speed, and meet customer needs (Bollinger & Smith, 2001; Fulmer & Goldsmith, 2000; Kovach,

1986; Larsen, 1997). The organization must be committed to fostering conditions that encourage

and reward the development of relationships as well as helping the employee develop a long-

term career perspective that is transparent to the organization.

 The Rhetoric and Reality 18

Third, education and training programs are powerful tools for transferring knowledge.

But for maximum effectiveness, they must be linked to implementation (McClelland, 1994).

Oftentimes, trainers wrongly assume that new techniques will be applied without taking concrete

steps to ensure that participants actually follow through (Garvin, 1993; Huczynski & Lewis,

1980). All too often training does not provide opportunities for practice, and even fewer

programs consciously promote the application of their teachings after employees have returned

to their jobs (Garvin, 1993). The high potential candidate must be given the opportunity to

demonstrate the knowledge and skills acquired. Organizations must endeavor to understand how

to best design training programs that will be most effective under a variety of changing

circumstances, for different levels at different stages of individual development in order to

maximize the ability to promote both individual and organizational learning (Ready et al., 1994).

Therefore, the organization must be willing to invest more in pre- and post-training efforts to

enhance transferability on the job.

Last but not least, the organization should reconsider the psychological contract in all

aspects of leadership development. The restructuring of business is tied in with a change in

psychological contracts between employee and employer (Rousseau, 1995). When it comes to

management development for example, the issue will be to rethink the understanding of how the

development will benefit the incumbent and fit the long-term strategy of the organization rather

than seeing these training processes as being isolated incremental events to fix short-term

problems. The objective should be to help the manager grow in intellectual breadth, to broaden

his or her grasp of knowledge generation, and to sharpen and refine his or her application of

knowledge to specific situations. ____________________

Insert Table 1 Here

____________________
 The Rhetoric and Reality 19

Research Directions

The emerging interest in management development for the 21st century requires, and will

hopefully receive, considerable scholarly inquiry. Despite the widespread use of fast track

development programs within organizations, little information is available on such issues as

program effectiveness, participant’s reactions to the programs or the developmental practices that

should be used in these programs (Feild & Harris, 1991; Kovach, 1986). As research advances, it

ought to be especially sensitive to preserving, and building upon the growing research available

on management development. While there are many potentially valid research issues that one

could identify, there are several topics that are particularly salient and warrant special attention.

First, assemble evidence to test if fast track management development is directly related

to improved managerial performance over a period of time. As discussed above, it has been

suggested that implementing a fast track into managerial development programs does provide

tangible benefits to the organization as well as the participant. However, there is little available

guidance for those interested in designing, implementing or assessing such programs (Feild &

Harris, 1991). Gaining an understanding of the long-term perspective and its relationship to

managerial behavioral change should greatly advance organizations that wish to take advantage

of accelerated management development programs (Keys & Wolfe, 1988).

Second, it would be useful to understand whether there are subsequent performance

differences between organizations that offer such programs and those who do not (Keys &

Wolfe, 1988). There is limited evidence of systematic evaluations of management training

between organizations (Saari et al., 1988). It is speculated that organizations that provide

management development programs are better able to identify and develop managerial talent

than their competitors who do not offer such programs (Larsen, 1997).
 The Rhetoric and Reality 20

Finally, understand and define what variations are possible to replace accelerated

management development programs. Few, if any, researchers believe that traditional fast track

management programs can continue to operate in their current state (Viney et al., 1997). The old

paradigm of a manager steadily moving up the organizational hierarchy is giving way to the new

paradigm of moving across organizations and even industries to increase breadth of skills and

knowledge. The development of case studies or surveys involving organizations that have

sponsored management development programs should give us key information as to ways to

understand how should such programs should be designed, and by whom for maximum

effectiveness.

Summary and Conclusions

Managing an organization’s management development effort requires the organization

undertake a broad range of management development activities including defining the

organization’s long term strategy, identifying individuals who are in the best position to

understand and implement those strategies, and helping to develop those individuals so they can

make a positive contribution to the implementation of the organization’s strategy.

The process of management development is not about executives and other leaders in the

organization placing recruits into a rigid and predefined management training program so they

may hopefully become future managers. The emphasis is on developing an organization’s most

important resource – its management potential using tools and processes that are adaptable to the

needs of both the organization and the management candidate. Throughout this discussion, I

have developed a framework for management development professionals to understand how to

best help organizations exploit their management development efforts in order to help the

organization achieve leadership or competitive advantages. Organizations possess unique

 The Rhetoric and Reality 21

resources and skills – capabilities that should be nurtured and leveraged to guide strategic

decisions. These unique resources and skills need to be properly guided so that the same

operating principles are understood and internalized so that all individuals within an organization

can help implement the strategic intent of the firm through skill development and

implementation.

A well-designed management development program supports the fact that change is a

constant in today’s market place and the success or failure of a product or service depends to a

significant degree on the skill, knowledge, talents, experience and abilities of its management

resources. In response to this, an organization that recognizes the linkage between strategic

management development and firm strategy will have a distinct advantage (McClelland, 1994).

The linkage between an organization’s management development practices and how it

can use tools and practices to place itself in a better strategic position represents a new and

exciting area for management development professionals (Ready et al., 1994). Although the cost

of assessing the organization’s management development effort is difficult to measure,

competent management will be a key competitive advantage for the firm. However, the value of

a firm’s management development system depends on implementation, which in turn depends on

a firm’s business model, its corporate culture, and its history.

In conclusion, this research has potentially significant implications for both management

development researchers and managerial practitioners. The successful design and

implementation of firm strategy will depend upon effective management identification and

development (Cope, 1998; Harris & Feild, 1992). Furthermore, this research suggests that there

are complex issues involved in management selection and development within each organization

(Larsen, 1997). The complexity is far greater than most organizations may be aware. Thus, it
 The Rhetoric and Reality 22

provides more theoretical support of the need for management to carefully consider an

organization’s strategic focus and the role it plays in the design and implementation of a fast

track management development program.

 The Rhetoric and Reality 23

References
Allread, B., Snow, C., & Miles, R. (1996). Characteristics of managerial careers in the 21st

century. Academy of Management Executive, 10 (4), 17 – 27.

Arthur, M., & Rousseau, D. (1996). A career lexicon for the 21st century. Academy of

Management Executive, 10 (4), 28 – 39.

Baruch, Y., & Peiperl, M. (1997). High flyers: glorious past, gloomy present, any future? Career

Development International, 2 (7), 354 – 358.

Bollinger, A., & Smith, R. (2001). Managing organizational knowledge as a strategic asset.

Journal of Knowledge Management, 5 (1), 8 – 18.

Burke, L. (1997). Developing high-potential employees in the new business reality. Business

Horizons, 40, 18 – 24.

Coaley, K., Knightley, R. & Beard, D. (1993). The identification of management potential.

Executive Development, 6 (2), 7 – 8.

Cope, F. (1998). Current issues in selecting high potentials. Human Resource Planning, 21 (3),

15 – 17.

Cummings, A., & Oldham, G. (1997) Enhancing creativity: Managing work contexts for the high

potential employee. California Management Review, 40 (1), 22 – 38.

Derr, C., Jones, C., & Toomey, E. (1988). Managing high potential employees: Current practices

in thirty-three U.S. corporations. Human Resource Management, 27 (3), 273 – 290.

Digman, B. (1980). How companies assess management development needs. Academy of

Management Best Paper Proceedings. 99 – 103.

Ettorre, L. (1997). Keeping the cream. HR Focus, 74 (7), 9 – 12.

 The Rhetoric and Reality 24

Feild, H., & Harris, S. (1991). Entry-level, fast-track management development programs:

Developmental tactics and perceived program effectiveness. Human Resource Planning,

14 (4), 261 – 273.

Foxman, L., & Polsky, W. (1988). Develop the potential of high achievers. Personnel Journal,

67 (6), 32 – 34.

Fulmer, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2000). “Future leadership development”. In Chowdhury, S, (Ed.),

Management 21C. (pp. 172 – 185). London, England: Prentice Hall.

Garvin, D. (1993). “Building a learning organization”. In Harvard Business Review on

Knowledge Management (pp. 47 – 80). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Gunn, E. (1998). The fast track is where to be, if you can find it. Fortune, 138 (2), 152.

Gunz, H., & Jalland, R. (1996). Managerial careers and business sttrategies. Academy of

Management Review, 21 (3), 718 – 756.

Hall, D. (1999). Accelerate executive development – at your peril! Career Development

International, 4 (4), 237 – 239.

Hall, D. (1995). Executive careers and learning: Aligning selection, strategy and development.

Human Resource Planning, 18 (2), 14 – 23.

Harris, S., & Feild, H. (1991). Realizing the “potential” of “high-potential” management

development programmes. Journal Of Management Development, 11 (1), 61 – 70.

Heisler, W., & Benham, P. (1992). The challenge of management development in North America

in the 1990s. Journal Of Management Development, 11 (2), 16 – 31.

Huczynski, A. & Lewis, J. (1980). An empirical study into the learning transfer process in

management training. The Journal of Management Studies, 17 (2), 227 – 240.

 The Rhetoric and Reality 25

Iles, P., Forster, A., & Tinline, G. (1996). The changing relationships between employability,

personal flexibility and work commitment: a field experiment in executive education.

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 11 (8), 18 – 35.

Iles, P. (1997). Sustainable high-potential career development: A resource based view. Career

Development International, 2 (7), 347 – 353.

Keys, B., & Wolfe, J. (1988). Management Education and Development: Current Issues and

Emerging Trends. Journal of Management, 14 (2), 205 – 229.

Kovach, B. (1988). Survival on the Fast Track. New York: Dodd, Mead.

Kovach, B. (1986). The derailment of fast-track managers. Organizational Dynamics, 15 (2), 417

– 48.

Larsen, H., London, M., Weinstein, M., & Raghuram, S. (1998). High-flyer management-

development programs: Organizational rhetoric or self-fulfilling prophecy. International

Studies of Management & Organization, 28 (1), 64 – 91.

Larsen, H. (1997). Do high-flyer programs facilitate organizational learning? Journal of

Managerial Psychology, 12 (1), 48 – 59.

Lane, M., Blakely, G., & Martinec, C. (1992). Management development training in the 1990s -

present trends and future directions. Executive Development, 5 (2), 17 – 19.

London, M. (1983). Toward a theory of career motivation. Academy of Management Review, 8

(4), 620 – 630.

Margerison, C. (1992). What managers want from management development. Target

Management Development Review, 5 (1), 23 – 27.

McCall, M. (1998). High Flyers: Developing the Next Generation of Leaders. Boston: Harvard

Business School Press.

 The Rhetoric and Reality 26

McCauley, C., Lombardo, M., & Usher, C. (1989). Diagnosing management development needs:

An instrument based on how managers develop. Journal of Management, 15 (3), 389 –

403.

McClelland, S. (1994). Gaining competitive advantage through strategic management

development. Journal of Management Development, 13 (5), 4 – 13.

Northcraft, G., Griffith, T., & Shalley, C. (1991). Building top management muscle in a slow

growth environment: How different is better at Greyhound Financial Corporation.

Academy of Management Executive, 6 (1), 32 – 41.

Pan, S., & Scarbrough, H. (1999). Knowledge management in practice: An exploratory case

study. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 11 (3), 359 – 374.

Patton, D., & Pratt, C. (2002). Assessing the training needs of high-potential managers. Public

Personnel Management, 31 (4), 465 – 484.

Peterson, D. (2002). Management development: Coaching and mentoring programs. In K.

Kraiger (Ed.), Creating, implementing, and managing effective training and development:

State-of-the-art lessons for practice (pp. 160 – 191). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Ready, D., Vicere, A., & White, A. (1994). Toward a systems approach to executive

development. Journal of Management Development, 13 (5), 64 – 71.

Rousseau, D. (1996). Changing the deal while keeping the people. Academy of Management

Executive, 10 (1), 50 – 58.

Saari, L., Johnson, T., McLaughlin, S., & Zimmerle, D. (1988). A survey of management

training and education practices in U.S. companies. Personnel Psychology, 41 (1), 731 –

743.
 The Rhetoric and Reality 27

Temperley, J. (1994). Identifying management development needs – Balancing individual and

organizational requirements. Executive Development, 7 (2), 28 – 31.

Vicere, A., Taylor, M., & Freeman, V. (1994). Executive development in major corporations: A

ten-year study. Journal of Management Development, 13 (1), 4 – 22.

Viney, C., Adamson S., & Doherty, N. (1997) Paradoxes of fast-track career management.

Personnel Review, 26 (3), 174 – 186.

Wexley, K., & Baldwin, T. (1986). Management development. Journal of Management, 12 (2),

277 – 294.

Wright, P., & Belcourt, M. (1994). Management development: A career management

perspective. International Journal of Career Management, 6 (5), 3 – 10.

Zemke, J. (1999). How to do a need assessment when you think you don’t have the time. In J.

Woods & J. Cortada (Eds.), The 1999 ASTD Training and Performance Yearbook (pp. 165

– 171). New York: McGraw-Hill.

 The Rhetoric and Reality 28

Table 1. Summarization of Benefits Versus Problems in a Fast Track Management Development

Program

Practice Rhetoric Reality Remedy

Job Rotations Typically gives Management may assign Job Rotation should be
participant high quality “busy work” to high pertinent to
exposure to organization. potential candidate. developmental need of
candidate.

Participant is in short term Require participant to

assignment where they
can’t develop a high degree
of technical expertise.
Special Gives participant Emphasis is on short-term
Assignments opportunity to get results, therefore managers
experience in solving may be reluctant in giving
challenging problems. out important assignments.
demonstrate certain
degree of expertise at
conclusion of
assignment.
Encourage managers to
give participants
challenging assignments
and require the
participant to be
accountable for results.

Experiential learning Non-participants may Organization must foster

helps reinforce new skills resent and subterfuge conditions where all
and behaviors. assignments. employees benefit.
Coaching and Gives participant Mentoring cannot be Create conditions that
Mentoring opportunity to get keen forced. encourage and reward
insights to performance the development of
and areas in need of Lack of understanding of mentoring relationships.
improvement. mentor/protégé
relationship.
Allows participants to
more fully develop “soft If coaching is tied to
skills”. position, candidate may not
receive good
developmental feedback
due to lack of time in
position.
Specific Skills Participant receives Lack of integration of Invest more in pre- and
Training specialized training in training requirements. post- training efforts to
industry/organization enhance transferability
specific requirements. on the job.